Short Note : 1. Jagannath Prasad was the owner of the disputed property and he died on 27-3-70. He left behind widow Phoolbai and two daughters Chameli and Bhagwatibai. Chameli filed a suit against Phoolbai and Bhawatibai for injunction and declaration that she was the owner of 1/3 share in the disputed property and there be an injunction that defendants should not alienate the property till the disposal of the suit. This application was rejected by the trial Court. The appellate Court granted the injunction asked for. Held: There is no dispute that Jagannath Prasad has left three heirs and each has 1/3 share in the said property. According to section 22 and 23 of Hindu Succession Act, every heir has a preferential right against that of other heir if the property is alienated by that heir. Therefore, presently Chamelibai Bhagwatibai and Phoolbai have equal shares in the property left by Jagannath Prasad and to that extent they are co-owners. One co-owner cannot deal with the property to the disadvantage of the other co-owners and one co-owner cannot alienate the whole property without the consent of other co-owners. It is also admitted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant that Phoolbai has entered into an agreement of sale of the said property. If the sale is allowed, then there will be multiplicity of suit. The purchasers will have to be brought in as defendants and that will create complication in the suit filed by Chamelibai. This Court thinks that the order passed by the appellate Court is proper and deserves no interference, Appeal dismissed.