SATYENDRA TIWARY Vs. JITENDRA TIWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri J.S. Arora, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Shashi Shekhar Dwivedi, learned Senior Counsel, who has appeared on behalf of respondent nos. 6, 7 and 8. Despite valid service of notice, respondent nos. .1 to 5 have preferred not to appear.

(2.) The present appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(r) of the Code of Civil Procedure has been preferred against an order dated 25.10.2010 passed in Title Partition Suit No. 32 of 2009, whereby petition filed by the plaintiff-appellant under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Sections 94 and 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for grant of injunction has been rejected.

(3.) Shri J.S. Arora, learned counsel for the appellant submits that despite the fact that prima facie case was in favour of the plaintiff and other ingredients were also in his favour, the learned Sub-Judge-I, Patna, without assigning any reason, has rejected the petition. He submits that the suit property is in jointness and no partition had taken place even then defendant nos. 1 and 2 had transferred some, of the suit property to defendant nos. 6 to 8 and as such it was a fit case for restraining all the defendants/respondents including purchaser/respondent nos. 6 to 8 from further alienating the property involved in the suit.