NARESH Vs. BABU LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision petition has been filed against the order dated 10.3.2005 passed by the Additional District Judge, Rewari, vide which the application filed by the plaintiff-petitioners herein under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC was dismissed.

(2.) THE petitioners herein filed a suit for declaration that they were owners in possession of the suit property as per jamabandi for the year 1998-99. It was claimed that defendant No. 4 wanted to alienate the share of the plaintiffs on the pretext of gift deed and it was averred that if defendant No. 4 succeeded to alienate the property and interfere in their possession in the suit land, they would suffer an irreparable loss and injury.

(3.) IN appeal, the learned lower Appellate Court on appreciation of documentary evidence came to the conclusion that Suraj Mal son of Girdhari was the owner in possession of the suit property. It also recorded a finding that there were no averments on the part of the plaintiffs that the suit land was purchased from any joint fund of joint Hindu Family and, therefore, the finding of the learned trial Court that the property was ancestral was found to be erroneous. The learned lower Appellate court further came to the conclusion that even if the property is assumed coparcenary in nature, Shri Suraj Mal being a Karta of the family could not be restrained from alienating the same and for this purpose it relied upon the judgments of this Court in the case of Jujhar Singh v. Tarlok Singh, 1986 RRR 618 : 1986 PLJ 346 and Lal Dass v. Raghubir Dass, 2003(4) RCR(Civil) 415 : AIR 2004 P&H 41. The learned lower Appellate Court also took note of the fact that no injunction can be granted against the true owner. Therefore, in view of these findings, the appeal was accepted.