Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rajwinder Kaur @ Rajinder Kaur And ... vs Kuldeep Singh And Others on 19 July, 2011
Author: Jaswant Singh
Bench: Jaswant Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CR No.4306/2011
Date of decision: 19.07.2011.
Rajwinder Kaur @ Rajinder Kaur and others
....................Petitioners
v.
Kuldeep Singh and Others.
.....................Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh
Present: Mr.Gurmeet Singh,Advocate for the petitioners.
Jaswant Singh.J.(Oral)
Petitioners/plaintiffs have approached this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution assailing the order dated 16.8.2010 (P2) whereby their application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC seeking temporary injunction has been dismissed. Further challenge is to the order dated 11.5.2011 (P1) whereby the appeal filed against the order dated 16.8.2010 (P2) has also been dismissed.
It is apparent from the record that the suit land was owned by one Karnail Singh @ Kailu. He died in the year 1988 and was survived by four sons, six daughters and widow Gurbachan Kaur. During his lifetime Kailu executed a Will dated 9.8.1988 in favour of his four sons and one daughter Balbir Kaur and widow Gurbachan Kaur in equal shares. Mutation no.1098/88 of inheritance was sanctioned in favour of aforesaid six persons. Accordingly, they were shown as owners and in possession of the suit land. Subsequently, vide Gift deed dated 22.2.2002 the widowed mother Gurbachan Kaur and sister Balbir Kaur also gifted their share in favour of four brothers. After a lapse of 22 years, four daughters of Kailu and sisters of respondents/defendants 1 to 4 filed a suit for declaration assailing the mutation with consequential relief of joint possession and permanent injunction. On the basis of pleadings and documents on record both the courts below declined interim injunction seeking to restrain the defendants/respondents from alienating the suit land.
After hearing the learned counsel I find that the view taken by both the courts below is legal and justified warranting no interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution.
Dismissed.
19.7.2011. (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge