Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 3947 (ALL)

Rekha Indaulia v. Bahadur Singh

2016-12-07

K.J.THAKER, SUDHIR AGARWAL

body2016
JUDGMENT Sudhir Agarwal and Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, JJ. -- Heard Sri Harshit Pathak, Advocate holding brief of Sri Anurag Pathak, learned counsel for appellants and learned counsel for respondents, and perused the record. 2. This appeal under Order LXIII Rule 1(r) of Civil Procedure Code(hereinafter referred to as 'CPC') has been filed against order dated 16.7.2011 passed by Additional District Judge, Court No. 15 Agra in Original Suit No. 365 of 2010 (Smt. Rekha Indaulia and others vs. Sri Bahadur Singh and others) whereby application 8-C and 53-C of plaintiffs-appellants seeking interim injunction and prayer for restraining defendants-respondents and their agents or associates from interfering in use and enjoyment of plaintiffs over the suit property, has been rejected on the ground that plaintiffs could not show any prima facie case or balance of convenience or loss. 3. Plaintiffs-appellants filed Original Suit No. 365 of 2010 seeking permanent prohibitory injunction against defendants from interfering in their use and enjoyment in the suit property. Details of suit property are given at the bottom of plaint which refers to plot measuring 751.23 Sq. Meter out of Khasra nos. 490 TA, 491 Da and 492 Cha in Revenue village Magtai, Tehsil and District Agra. 4. Court below has held that Ratan Singh was not authorised to execute sale deed in respect to plot No. 491-Da and having said so, Trial Court has not granted interim injunction in respect to aforesaid plot. Trial Court has referred to paper No. 66-Ga i.e. sale deed executed by Indrawati Devi in favour of plaintiff Rekha whereby plots no.490 Ta, 491-Da and 492-Cha measuring area 369.78 sq. meter have been transferred. Similarly, there was another sale deed (paper No. 77-C) executed by Smt. Indrawati Devi in favour of Yogendra Singh transferring plots no. 490-Ta and 491-Da measuring area 381.45 sq. meter. Thus, total area transferred by Smt. Indrawati Devi in favour of Yogendra Singh and plaintiff-Rekha comes to 751.23 sq. meter 5. Court below held that as Ratan Singh was not recorded as 'Bhumidhar' of Araji No. 491-Da in khatauni filed before Lower Court, said property(Araji No. 491-Da) could not have been sold by Ratan Singh to Smt. Indrawati. Thus Smt. Indrawati could not confer such right to sell said property to plaintiff-appellant Rekha; and therefore plaintiffs had no right in plot No. 491-Da. Thus Smt. Indrawati could not confer such right to sell said property to plaintiff-appellant Rekha; and therefore plaintiffs had no right in plot No. 491-Da. It was held that permanent injunction had been sought in respect to plots 490 Ta, 491-Da and 492 Cha while in respect to Araji Nos. 491-Da and 492-Cha plaintiff, prima facie have no right at all. In these facts and circumstances, the Court below has found that there was no prima facie case or balance of convenience established in favour of plaintiffs, hence question of grant of interim injunction did not arise. Said finding is not disputed before us. Therefore, we find no error apparent factually or otherwise warranting interference. No other point has been argued. Appeal lacks merit. 6. Dismissed at the stage of admission under Order 41 Rule 11 CPC.