Court No. - 30
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4748 of 2019 Petitioner :- Shree Ram Respondent :- Smt. Savitri And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Hriday Narayan Pandey
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.
Present petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 5.3.2019 passed by the Ist Additional District Judge, Jhansi as well as the order dated 26.9.2015 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jhansi.
By the impugned order dated 26.9.2015 the trial Court rejected the interim injunction application filed by the plaintiff (petitioner herein). Misc. Appeal filed by the petitioner was also dismissed by the lower appellate Court. Interim injunction application was rejected by the trial Court on the ground that there exists a registered sale deed in favour of the defendant no. 2 executed by defendant no. 1 who is wife of plaintiff and as such, no prima facie has been made out at this stage.
The suit was filed for cancellation of sale deed and injunction. The trial Court has noticed in the sale deed that it has been mentioned that the seller has executed a registered sale deed in respect of her share. The lower appellate Court has also noticed the fact that sale deed was executed in the year 2009 and the suit was filed after a gap of six years disputing the partition in the year 2015.
Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the findings recorded by the Courts below are totally perverse. The petitioner is owner of the ancestral property and his wife has not right to transfer the property.
I have considered the submissions and perused the record.
For the reasons noted for rejecting the interim injunction application, I do not find any jurisdictional error in the impugned orders.
Present petition is devoid of merits and is dismissed accordingly.
Order Date :- 31.5.2019 Abhishek