(1.) THIS order will dispose of three RSAs No.154 of 2011, 159 of 2011 and 24 of 2012 as common questions of law and facts are involved in all the three appeals and can be decided by a common judgment. The facts are taken from RSA No.154 of 2011.
(2.) THE sale of part share in joint land by a brother of the plaintiffsappellants with specific khasra numbers has to be read as sale of the share of the brother and the khasra numbers are ignorable till such time the partition proceedings take place and the joint land is divided by metes and bounds among the co -sharers.
(3.) I find no palpable error in reasoning committed or the conclusion arrived at by the lower appellate Court in reversing the judgment and decree of the learned trial Court holding in first appeal that an injunction would not lie against a co -owner in a situation of the present kind presented in the suits. Besides, the learned lower appellate court has noticed that there is no averment in the plaint that the present appellants were in exclusive settled possession of a particular part of the joint land which is nonetheless agricultural in nature in order to invite consideration of the court for issuance of an injunction in favour of the plaintiffs. It may be noted that the defendants are non -family members who have stepped into the shoes of the selling co -sharer of joint land by a sale deed to the extent of the vendor's share.