AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Dev Darshan Sud, J.—The petitioner is aggrieved by order passed by the learned Courts below whereby application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC for interim injunction filed by respondent No. 1-plaintiff was allowed by the learned trial Court and affirmed by the learned Appellate Court. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that he is co-sharer in the land and in this eventuality; the plaintiff-respondent has no right, title or interest to raise construction on the best/valuable portion of the suit land. This is a matter which is to be decided by the learned trial Court during the trial of the suit.
The law with respect to the right of co-sharers is now well settled in Sant Ram Nagina Ram Vs. Daya Ram Nagina Ram and Others, . Gajara Vishnu Gosavi Vs. Prakash Nanasahed Kamble and Others, and Jai Singh and Others Vs. Gurmej Singh, . However, in any event, it is open for the trial Court to adjudicate as to whether the parties are co-sharers or not and whether the ratio of three cases supra is attracted to the facts and circumstances of the case. In these circumstances, I do not intend to interfere in the order of the learned trial Court. The learned trial Court shall endeavour to dispose of the suit expeditiously. Petition stands disposed of.