HARIRAM Vs. MORU DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved with the order dtd. 7/3/2022 passed by the Additional District Judge No.1, Barmer (hereinafter to be referred as 'the appellate court') whereby, the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. The said appeal was preferred by the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dtd. 7/9/2021 passed by the Additional Civil Judge No.1, Barmer (hereinafter to be referred as 'the trial court') on an application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 read with Sec. 151 CPC whereby, the parties were directed to maintain status quo till the pendency of the suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the respondent-plaintiff has filed a suit before the trial court seeking permanent injunction claiming that a piece of land was purchased by her father-in-law and later on the same was transferred in her name, but the petitioner-defendant is trying to encroach over the said piece of land, therefore, he may be restrained from interfering in the peaceful possession of the respondent-plaintiff by way of issuing permanent injunction.

(3.) Along with the said suit, an application for temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 read with Sec. 151 CPC is also filed. Reply to the said application was filed on behalf of the petitioner-defendant wherein, it was claimed that as a matter of fact, the father-in-law of the respondent-plaintiff was owner of one of the plots and not the owner of the entire land. In support of the above contention, the petitioner-defendant has furnished copies of the agreement to sale executed in favour of him and the other persons and has also placed on record certain documents claiming that in one of the complaints initiated at the instance of the husband of the respondent-plaintiff, the police has clearly opined that the documents on which the respondentplaintiff is placing reliance are forged one.