RAM PHALAND ORS. Vs. SMT. GIANO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present revision petition has been filed against the order passed by the learned courts below vide which application moved by the petitioners under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short the Code) has been ordered to be dismissed.

(2.) In the application it was prayed that the petitioner -plaintiffs being owners in possession of the suit land, the mutation sanctioned in favour of the defendant was illegal and therefore, liable to be set aside. It was claimed that the defendant -respondent has no right to alienate the suit land. It was pleaded that in case the defendant -respondent succeeds in her illegal mission, the plaintiffs would suffer an irreparable loss and injury which cannot be compensated in any manner. Balance of convenience was also claimed to be in favour of the plaintiffs.

(3.) On notice, the defendant contested the application on the plea that the same was not maintainable as the plaintiffs were not owners in possession of the suit property. The defendant had also filed a suit bearing No. 660 of 1986 which stood decreed up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court regarding the subject matter of the present suit and impugned mutation was sanctioned in view of the judgment and decree passed by the civil court which was upheld up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It was also the case of the defendant that a similar suit was filed by the plaintiffs earlier. It was claimed that the defendant being the owner has right to deal with the property in the way she likes and no loss or injury is likely to be suffered by the plaintiff -petitioners.