AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
4 paragraphs · 152 wordsSabina, J.—Plaintiff has filed a suit for declaration to the effect that he was co-sharer/co-owner in joint possession of the suit property. Along with the suit, an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the CPC was filed. Vide order dated 22.5.2010, Civil Judge (Senior Division) restrained the Defendants from selling, alienating, mortgaging and changing the nature of the suit property to the extent of 1/3rd share. The said order was set aside, in an appeal filed by Defendants, by Additional District Judge vide order dated 22.12.2010. Hence, the present appeal by the Plaintiff.
Learned Counsel for the Respondents has submitted that the Defendants do not intend to sell the suit property, during the pendency of the suit.
In view of the statement, made by counsel for the Respondents, learned Counsel for Petitioner has submitted that he does not press this petition.
Petition stands disposed of accordingly.