ANWAR ALI KHAN Vs. MSSTT FARIDA BEGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal arises out of an interlocutory injunction passed in a suit pertaining to an immovable property.

(2.) The appellants are the four brothers of the first respondent-plaintiff. According to the appellants, in a previous partition suit between the two branches of the appellant's father's family represented by two wives, a compromise decree was passed recognising the appellants herein as the joint owners of the immovable property in respect whereof the present partition suit has been filed by the first respondent. The appellants demonstrate that there is no relief claimed in the suit challenging the compromise decree in the previous partition suit and an attempt to amend the plaint to incorporate such relief failed and even a revision challenging the dismissal of the amendment application has failed in this court.

(3.) The first respondent says that in course of the previous partition suit a compromise was, indeed, recorded in favour of the appellants herein, but there is no thumb impression of the mother in the document and no document evidencing that the mother had gifted the property to her four sons and to the exclusion of her daughter. The first respondent submits that it was upon the matter pertaining to the previous partition suit being brought to the notice of the first respondent in course of the present proceedings that the first respondent sought to amend the plaint. Though the amendment application was dismissed and a petition challenging such order has also failed in this court, the first respondent suggests that since a review against the order of this court is pending, the present appeal should not be disposed of or the injunction order impugned should not be undone. According to the first respondent, if the amendment application is allowed and the amendment challenging the compromise decree in the previous partition suit is incorporated, the order of injunction assailed in the present appeal would be a routine order.