Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3.2 It is further submitted that the Regular Civil Suit no.97 of 1994 was preferred against the order of the revenue authorities which was allowed by judgment dated 29.03.2006 and orders of the NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2541/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/09/2025 undefined revenue authorities, were quashed and set aside. Regular Civil Appeal no.79 of 2006 was preferred against the judgment and it was decided only on 11.07.2019. The proceedings in connection with entry no.3497, got crystalized, which gave cause to the plaintiff to file the suit. It is submitted that in the interregnum, i.e. from 29.03.2006 till the appeal was preferred, the sale deed dated 19.06.2006 was executed for one parcel of land. It is further submitted that during the pendency of the suit proceedings, injunction was in operation, and in the teeth of injunction, second registered sale deed came to be executed on 06.05.2015 in favour of defendant nos.6 and 7. Therefore, it is a no transaction in the eye of law. Considering the limitation from 2019, the suit, is within the limitation and cannot be said to be barred by law. It is further submitted that an Application no.47 of 1988 seeking probate was filed, which was dismissed for want of prosecution on 02.02.1993; however, no steps have been taken for its restoration and therefore, there are no proceedings of probate pending.