KUSUM TANDON Vs. KANWAL TANDON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT is the common case of the parties that Dr. Charanjit Lal was the owner of the property in dispute. Mutation No. 4365 was sanctioned in favour of the appellants on the basis of Will dated 16.4.1984. Basing their claim on the strength of mutation, appellants filed a civil suit for restraining the respondents from alienating the property in suit. In that suit, appellants sought temporary injunction by making an application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the C.P.C. Application was dismissed by the trial Court and in appeal, the order of the trial Court was affirmed. Revision against that order was dismissed by this Court and the S.L.P. against that orders was withdrawn. Subsequently, a suit has been filed by the appellants for partition for separate possession. In this suit also application has been filed under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C., which on contest, has been dismissed by the trial Court. The present appeal is against the order of the trial Court dismissing application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC.

(2.) HAVING regard to the fact that earlier appellants had failed to obtain injunction on the basis of mutation which had been sanctioned on the basis of Will and the present suit too is on the basis of the same very Will, I am of the view that the appellants have rightly been refused injunction by the trial Court. However, in order to protect the interest of appellants, if any, in that suit, it is ordered that in case the respondents alienate the property, they would make aware the vendee about the pendency of the litigation by making a mentioned of the same in the Sale Deed. Any observation made herein shall not affect the merits of the case. Accordingly, this appeal stands disposed of.