JAI LAL RAI Vs. BRIJ KISHORE SINGN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for appellants and the respondents under Order 41 Rule 11 C.P.C.

(2.) This Misc. Appeal has been filed by the defendants first party and defendant second party appellants against the order dated 29.4.2003 passed by the learned Sub Judge-Ist, Vaishali at Hajipur in Title Suit No. 543/2001 whereby the learned court below allowed the injunction application and restrained the appellants No. 1 to 7 from making any alteration in the land sold to them by defendants second party, i.e. appellant No. 8 and also restrained the second party defendant, i.e., appellant No. 8 with respect to transfer of land standing in the name of Sri Mahadeo Singh.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that the learned court below has restrained the appellant No. 8 without service of notice on her. According to the learned Counsel unless there was special circumstance no injunction could have been granted against the appellant No. 8 without hearing her. The learned Counsel further submitted that the learned court below has wrongly allowed the application for injunction because even if there is transfer during the pendency of the suit the transfer will be hit by Section 52 of the transfer of Property Act. The learned Counsel further submitted that the learned court below has wrongly found that the plaintiffs respondents have got prima facie case. The learned Counsel further submitted that the address given by the plaintiff regarding appellant No. 8 in the plaint is wrong and, therefore, no notice was served on her on the address where she is living.