NASIM Vs. ROKIYA BIBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

(2.) Petitioner in this CMP seeks to assail the order dtd. 8/9/2023 (Annexure-5) passed by learned 3rd Additional District Judge, Balasore in FAO No.17 of 2022, whereby allowing the appeal, learned appellate Court reversed the order dtd. 16/4/2022 (Annexure-4) passed by learned Senior Civil Judge, Balasore in I.A. No.380 of 2018 (CIS No.544 of 2018) [arising out of CS No.1082/1692 of 2018] partly allowing an application under order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC refusing to grant injunction in respect of B Schedule Property.

(3.) It is submitted by Mr. Baug, learned counsel for the petitioner that the suit has been filed for setting aside the compromise decree passed in CS No.946 of 2007 in respect of B Schedule Property. The Plaintiff also prayed for partition of the B and C schedule property. Learned trial Court, holding that a decree has already been passed in respect of B Schedule property, refused to grant any interim order of injunction in respect of the same. However, considering the materials available on record, learned trial Court directed the parties to maintain status-quo in respect of the C Schedule property in the said I.A. Learned trial Court, holding that the validity of the compromise decree is a matter of adjudication in the suit itself and the Plaintiffs-Opposite parties have raised a substantial question for adjudication in the suit held the prima facie case in favour of the Plaintiffs-Opposite Parties.