- (1.) By way of this appeal, the plaintiffs of Civil Suit No.653 of 2015 filed in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Malihabad, Lucknow, seek to question the order dated 18.5.2015, whereby the learned trial court has rejected their application for temporary injunction against dispossession from the property in question.
(2.) After having heard learned counsel for the appellants at length and having perused the material on record, we are clearly of the view that the learned trial court has rightly rejected the baseless application filed by the plaintiffs-appellants and the order impugned does not appear suffering from any arbitrariness or failure of justice so as to warrant interference in appeal.
(3.) Put in brief, the relevant aspects of the matter are that the plaintiffs-appellants had executed a registered sale deed for the property in question on 12.02.2013 on a sale consideration of Rs.3,90,000/-, as admittedly said to have been recited in the sale deed. The plaintiffs-appellants, however, filed the aforesaid suit seeking the relief of perpetual injunction essentially on the submission that the sale consideration was otherwise settled at Rs.10.00 Lakhs in the agreement to sell; and though the property in question carried higher valuation but, at the request of defendant, they agreed to put the valuation only at a sum of Rs.3,90,000/- in the sale deed; and that the defendant otherwise agreed to take possession only after making payment of the rest of the amount. It has been the case of the appellants that the valuation of house in question was much excessive than the settled amount. The plaintiffs-appellants sought temporary injunction in the suit on the submissions that they were in possession of the property in question and the defendant was required to be restrained from dispossessing them.;