KALIPADA POIRYA Vs. BANAMALI SAMANTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Satish Chandra Poirya, since deceased was the original owner of a piece and parcel of land measuring about 20 decimals in plot No.284 appertaining to khatian No.78 of mouja Bhagwanpur within P.S Debra (hereafter the suit property). Nature of the suit property has been recorded as Kala/bastu in the L.R Record of Rights. After the death of Satish Chandra, the suit property was inherited by his four sons, namely, Sreepati Charan Poirya, Bhibhuti Charan, Pashupati and Bijoy Krishna in equal share. While the abovenamed co-sharers had been possessing the suit property jointly in respect of their undivided share, they decided to effect partition of the suit property along with other joint property and by virtue of a registered deed of partition dated 19th August, 1943, the suit was partitioned amongst the abovenamed co-sharers. It is, however, contended that in spite of such partition, the suit property was not demarcated by metes and bounds between the co-sharers. The plaintiffs/petitioners and proforma defendants/opposite parties have been possessing the suit property jointly as per their sharers. It alleged by the plaintiffs/petitioners that the proforma defendants/opposite parties surreptitiously transferred their undivided 1/4th share in the suit property by executing a registered deed of sale in favour of principal defendants/opposite parties No.1 and 2. After purchasing the opposite parties took genuine attempts to raise construction over the suit property which prompted the petitioners to institute Title Suit No.172 of 2014 in the 3rd Court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Paschim Medinipur.

(2.) In the said suit, the petitioners filed an application under order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereafter CPC) for temporary injunction against opposite parties No.1 and 2 restraining them from raising any construction over the suit property till the disposal of the suit.

(3.) By an order dated 10th November, 2014, the learned trial judge rejected petitioners' prayer for temporary injunction. The said order dated 10th November, 2014 was assailed by the petitioners by preferring Misc Appeal No.110 of 2014 which was also dismissed by judgment and order dated 22nd June, 2016. This order is impugned in the instant revision under Article 227 of the Constitution at the instance of the plaintiffs/petitioners.