CNR.NO. WBJP04-000138-2024 J.O. Code.

WB01544
T.S.115 of 2024
Order no. 11
Dated 12.08.2024
Today is fixed for passing of order with respect to the petition U/O 39 R 1&2 and O 39 R 4.
Both sides are present by filing haziras.
Ld advocate for the plaintiff and the defendant has taken back their original documents which they
has filed during the hearing and have made their endorsements as received on their respective haziras.
It transpires from the record that the Proforma Defendants No. 2 & 3 had filed W.S on 18.07.2024 as
they were not aware of the preponement of the date of hearing to 25.06.2024. As such they have filed
one application for acceptance of the WS.
Considering the circumstance in which the Proforma defendants have filed their respective WS, the
same is hereby accepted.
Now the record is taken up for passing of Order with respect to the petition U/O 39 R 1&2 and O 39
R 4. The defendant petitioner contends that the continuation of the Order of ad interim dated
21.02.2024 will cause injustice to the petitioners and prays for vacating the same for greater interest
of justice.
Brief fact of the case:
The plaintiff appeared and filed a petition praying for an order of ad interim injunction for protection
of his possession over the suit plot. Ld. Predecessor of this court was pleased to pass an exparte order
restraining the defendants and their men from disturbing the peaceful possession of the plaintiff upon
establishing a prima facie case on the part of the plaintiff.
The defendant after appearing filed the petition U/O 39 R 4 and WO against the O 39 R 1 and 2
petition. The petitioner further contended that the continuation of the Order of ad interim dated
21.02.2024 will cause injustice to the petitioners and prays for vacating the same for greater interest
of justice.
Defendant/Petitioner’s Case:
Perused the application filed by the Defendant No.1, written objection and other materials on
record.
Ld. Advocate for the petitioner has placed reliance upon certain documents as proof of his possession
over the suit plot. A Registered Sale Deed No. 10528/2022 – bearing Ankit Kumar Kedia as the
purchaser with respect to the R.S. Plot No. 18 L.R.Plot No 365/745, J.L 02, Sheet 04. R.S.Khatian No.
840/13 L.R.Khatian No. 2431. 2 kathas. Another Sale Deed No. 10778/2022 – Ankit Kumar Kedia as
the purchaser with respect to the R.S. Plot No. 18 L.R.Plot No 365/745, J.L 02, Sheet 04. R.S.Khatian
No. 840/13 L.R.Khatian No. 2431. 14.5 kathas. The petitioner has further adduced one L.R.ROR
No. 2798 bearing their name and after recording of the same he has been in possession thereof. The
petitioner has also adduced some khajna receipts paid by them in respect of the suit plot.
The Petitioner thus contends that statement of the plaintiff in para 9 of the injunction application
about conducting the physical verification and survey is completely false and misleading and the
injunction ought to be vacated as per O 39 R4 of the CPC.
O. P’s Case :
The O.P denied all the allegations of the petitioner and stated that they purchased the suit plot from
the legal heirs of the Original recorded owners of the subject suit. In order to substantiate his case, the
plaintiff has adduced the R.S Khatian, Death Certificates and Legal Heir Certificate, Original deeds of
conveyance being Sale Deed Being No. I-1088/2021, Sale Deed Being No. I-6731/2023, Sale Deed
Being No. I-8729/2023, Sale Deed Being No. I-8732/2023, Sale Deed Being No. I-8733/2023, Sale
Deed Being No. I-8771/2023 executed in his favor. After purchasing the same the plaintiffs have duly
paid the rents and has been possessing the suit plot without any disturbance. Furthermore, they have
applied for mutation and has adduced the application for mutation of the same before the appropriate
forum which is on process.
Prima facie it appears from the materials on record that both parties have supplied number of
registered documents as proof of conveyance and how they have acquired the title and possession
over the same. The truthfulness of the respective deeds and documents are matter to be determined at
the time of trial. However, at this juncture, any order passed without confirming the truthfulness of the
matter will cause prejudice to the parties.

Nevertheless, having considered the rival claims of the parties and documents placed before
this Court, and having due regard to the balance of convenience and inconvenience of the parties and
the comparative loss or injury which is likely to cause to either of the parties I am of the opinion that
it would be just and proper if there be an interim direction upon both the parties to maintain status
quo with regard to nature, character and possession in respect of the suit property, pending final
disposal of the suit.
Hence, it is
Ordered
that the petition for temporary injunction under Order 39, Rule 1 & 2 read with Section 151
CPC and the petition U/O 39 R 4 of the CPC is disposed of on contest with direction upon the parties
to maintain status quo with regard to the nature, character and possession of the suit property as on
this day of order, till the disposal of the suit.
Accordingly, both petitions are hereby disposed of on contest but without any cost.
Ld advocate for the plaintiff has filed one petition U/O 6 R 17.
Let the same be kept with the record.
To 27.08.2024 for hearing of the amendment petition.
Dictated & corrected by me,

Civil Judge, Junior Division Civil Judge, Junior Division