Sudhir Agarwal, Rakesh Srivastava, JJ. - (1.) Heard Sri S.K. Mehrotra learned counsel for appellants and Ms. Sufia Saba, Advocate for respondents.
(2.) This appeal under Section 96 C.P.C. has arisen from judgment and decree dated 18.08.2006 passed by Additional District Judge, Court No. 14, Moradabad in Original Suit No. 1138 of 1993 dismissing plaintiff appellants suit. The plaintiff no. 1 is a partnership Firm and plaintiff nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 are partners in the aforesaid Firm.
(3.) It is stated that certain property detailed in para 3 of the plaint was purchased and is partnership property. He also states that defendant no. 1 was using property independently. However, in para 8 it is stated that defendant is trying to damage and make fresh construction in the disputed property and is also trying to alienate the same. The defendant has filed written statement in which allegations of damage, reconstruction and alienation has been specifically denied. The plaintiff sought following relief in the suit:- ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]... English translation by Court "(A) The defendant, by way of an order of temporary injunction, may kindly be restrained from transferring the property situated at Sihora Govind, Tahsil and District Moradabad falling in Khasra No. 6B and shown in red colour in the sitemap appended to the plaint, the four boundaries of which are given below or any part of the aforesaid property to any person and from causing any sort of breakage in the aforesaid property and from raising any new construction thereon.";