JANARDAN SINGH Vs. DEEPNARAIN MISHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the defendant -petitioners.

(2.) ALL that has been done by the impugned order is that the suit for permanent injunction filed by the plaintiffs -opposite parties has been found to have not abated as a whole, as was sought to be canvassed by the petitioners by filing application dated 30.5.2007. This Court having perused the plaint which is Annexure -1 would itself find that the suit in question is out and out a suit for injunction as would be evident from the different averments made in the plaint. It is true that the plaintiffs in order to get this relief, while supporting their case of title had gone to project that whatever issue that had been raised by the defendants in their defence pertaining to their title, on the basis of which they had resisted the decree for injunction was not tenable. However, such plea taken as a whole in the context of relief would still leave the suit one for permanent injunction only.

(3.) IF that be so, can it said that the suit for permanent injunction filed against several defendants would abate only because one of them had died during pendency of the suit and his heirs were not brought on records by substituting him? The obvious answer will be in negative.