SUKHMANDER KAUR Vs. RIPUDAMAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is plaintiffs' revision petition challenging the impugned orders passed by the courts below whereby their prayer for ad interim injunction restraining the respondents from alienating the suit property during the pendency of the suit has been rejected.

(2.) BOTH the courts below while passing the impugned order have observed that in this case provisions of Section 52 of Transfer of Property Act are applicable to any alienation made by the respondents during the pendency of the suit and thus application was dismissed. Before this court, learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently submitted that the impugned orders are contrary to the principles of natural justice, equity and fairplay and the impugned order will lead to multiplicity of litigation.

(3.) IT is well settled that the power of the Court under Article 227 is limited to see that the Court below functions within the limit of its authority or its jurisdiction and the same is not by any means appellate in its nature for correcting errors in the decisions of subordinate courts or tribunals. IT is merely a power of superintendence to be used to keep them within the bound of their authority. I find support, in my aforesaid view, from the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Nagendra Nath Bora vs. Commissioner of Hills Division, and Appeals Assam, AIR 1958 SC 398 and Nibaran Chandra Bag vs.Mahendra Nath Ghughu, AIR 1963 SC 1895. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Mohd.Yunus vs.Mohd.Mustaqim and others(1983)4 SCC 566, observed as under: