NARENDRA KUMAR Vs. SHYAM SUNDER AND ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(r) of C.P.C. against the order dated 10.10.2012 passed by Additional District Judge No.1, Jodhpur in Civil Misc. Case No.77/2012, vide which, the application for Temporary Injunction filed by the appellant-plaintiff was partly allowed qua the property i.e. Tulsi Bhawan and Narsingh Bhawan but rejected the same qua the agricultural land.

(2.) The appellant Narendra Kumar filed a suit for partition of joint Hindu Family Properties, rendition of accounts, mesne profits as well as sought injunction against the respondents qua the suit property mentioned in para 3 of the plaint. The property 'A' comprised of Tulsi Bhawan, property 'B' comprised of Narsingh Bhawan and property 'C' was with respect to the agricultural land in Kheme Ka Kuan. Along with the said suit, an application for interim injunction seeking status quo with respect to the suit property was also filed. The trial court partially accepted the said application and directed the parties to maintain status quo with regard to Tusli Bhawan and Narsingh Bhawan i.e. Property 'A' and Property 'B' mentioned in para 3 of the plaint with further direction not to alienate the same to any other person. However, the said temporary injunction was refused qau property 'C' i.e. agricultural land situated in Kheme Ka Kuan. The said injunction qua the agricultural land was refused on the ground that the said land was the personal property of Shri Nand Kishore Agarwal i.e. the father of the appellant-plaintiff. The said land was purchased by Shri Nand Kishore Agarwal himself from the business, which was partitioned in the year 1962. Further, the said property was bequeathed to by way of Will to the respondents-defendants by Shri Nand Kishore Agarwal and further, the said land has already been surrendered to the Urban Improvement Trust, Jodhpur under Section 90-B of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act for conversion of the use of land and the appellant-plaintiff did not raise any objection inspite of the public notice dated 2.6.1994 issued by the Urban Improvement Trust, Jodhpur.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant while impugning the said order submitted that Shri Nand Kishor Agarwal was the Karta of the joint Hindu Family. He had purchased the said agricultural land out of the nucleus of joint Hindu Family fund and also by disposing of other ancestral property. Therefore, the same was amenable to partition. Thus, Shri Nand Kishore Agarwal had no right to bequeath the agricultural land by Will. Secondly, there was every likelihood of the respondents disposing of the property during the interim period, which would result in multiplicity of litigation and thus, the trial court erred in not passing the order for maintaining the status quo agricultural land.