Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1509 (ALL)

Ubaidullah v. Civil Judge (Senior Division)

2015-06-08

MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI

body2015
JUDGMENT Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. In view of the order proposed to be passed, notice need not to be issued to respondents. 3. By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs: - "I. Issue positive nature direction and direct the respondent no.2 not to take forcible possession of Gata No.2439 Area 0.890 hectare through the help of her relatives and other supportive persons and not to raise any unknown construction over the aforesaid Gata which was situated in the Birdpur No.10, Tola Imlihwa @ Thakurapur Post Shivpat Nagar, Tappa-Ghosh, Pargana & Tehsil Naugarh, Distt. Siddharth Nagar, during pendency of the temporary injunction application before the court below. II. Issue positive nature direction and direct the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Siddharth Nagar to decide the temporary injunction application 6Ga2 filed by the petitioner in Original Suit No.172 of 2015 within the time bound." 4. It appears that over the disputed property the brother of the defendant-respondent IInd Set namely Mahfujurrahman filed Civil Suit No.361 of 2012 for cancellation of gift deed dated 12.3.2013, which was registered on 16.3.2013. During the pendency of the said suit, the defendant-respondent IInd Set executed sale deed in favour of the defendant-respondent Ist Set on 30.6.2013. Thereafter, the petitioner had filed Suit No.172 of 2015 before the respondent no.1 for permanent injunction against the defendant-respondent Ist Set regarding Gata No.2439. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed an application under Order 39 Rule 1 CPC, which is registered as Paper No.6 Ga (2) for issuance of temporary injunction along with the affidavit. The said application was entertained on 29.5.2015 and as per the record the next date fixed is 17.7.2015. He further states that meanwhile there is every apprehension that the nature of property would be changed in the vacation. 5. In view of above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction to the respondent no.1 i.e. Civil Judge (SD), Siddharth Nagar to decide the application of the petitioner {6 Ga (2)} in Suit No.172 of 2015 in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably on the next date fixed i.e. 17.7.2015. For a period of six weeks or till the disposal of the said application, whichever is earlier, the status quo as existing today with regard to disputed property shall be maintained.