AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N. Ananda
The trial court has rejected the application for grant of temporary injunction. The plaintiff is a relative of first defendant; second defendant is the wife of first defendant. The suit schedule property is the joint property of defendants No. 1 and 2. There are differences between defendants No. 1 and 2.
It is the case of plaintiff that first defendant for himself and also as special power of attorney holder of second defendant had executed a registered usufructory mortgage deed in favour of plaintiff. The second defendant has seriously disputed this document.
The second defendant has contended that first defendant has forged her signatures on the special power of attorney, on the basis of which, I-defendant had executed usufructory mortgage deed in favour of plaintiff.
The learned trial judge has held that, special power of attorney said to have been executed by second defendant in favour of first defendant is prima-facie a forged document. In the circumstances, the plaintiff cannot contend that he is in possession of suit schedule property under Deed of Mortgage. The plaintiff has relied upon disputed material. Therefore, the learned trial judge has refused to grant an order of temporary injunction.
After hearing the Learned Counsel for parties, I find that plaintiff is relying on disputed material, on the basis of which, temporary injunction cannot be granted.
The Learned Counsel for plaintiff submits that order of Statusquo granted by this Court on 06.08.2010 may be continued and the trial court shall be directed to decide the case on merits within a timeframe.
The dispute relates to possession of property. In the circumstances, continuation of order of Statusquo without defining the nature of Statusquo would lead to further complications.
On reconsideration of the matter, I do find that the impugned order is neither perverse nor capricious. The impugned order does not call for interference.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. The learned trial judge is directed to decide the case within a period of six months from today, for which both parties shall extend their co-operation.