MOHRU Vs. MANGALRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal has been filed by the appellants -plaintiffs challenging the order dt. 17.11.11. passed by the Addl. District & Sessions Judge (FT) No. 1, Jaipur District, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') in T.I. Application No. 39/11 (347/05), whereby the trial Court has dismissed the T.I. Application of the appellants -plaintiffs. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants -plaintiffs have filed the suit before the trial Court for cancellation of the sale deed executed by the respondents -defendants and that the revenue proceedings are also going on before the Revenue Court. According to him the Revenue Court had granted the injunction vide the order dt. 15.2.03 for restraining the respondent No. 1 -defendant No. 1 from transferring or selling the land in question, however the respondent No. 1 has sold out the same in violation of the said order. The learned counsel, therefore, has submitted that the trial Court ought to have granted the application of the appellants seeking injunction in respect of the land in question.

(2.) AT the outset it is required to be stated that though the order dt. 17.11.11 has been challenged in the present appeal, no substantive progress has been made since the filing of the appeal. Even otherwise the property in question has already been sold out by the respondent No. 1, even as per the case of the appellants. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served at this juncture to grant an injunction in favour of the appellants as prayed for. The learned counsel for the appellants has failed to point out any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order passed by the trial Court and, therefore, the Court does not find any substance in the appeal. In that view of the matter the appeal is dismissed.