- (1.) These appeals have been filed by the plaintiff-appellants being aggrieved of the order dated 9.7.2009 passed by learned ADJ, Sangaria rejecting the application of the plaintiff-appellants for seeking temporary injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 C.P.C. The plaintiffs claimed in the suit that the sale deeds executed by the deceased Pyare Lal on 25.2.2009 in favour of Ram Kumar, father of respondent No.1 Girdwari Devi and in favour of Girdawari Devi herself were illegal and they were required to be cancelled.
(2.) In the said suit for cancellation of sale deeds, the plaintiffs, who are lineal descendants of brothers of deceased Pyare Lal claimed temporary injunction by the aforesaid application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 C.P.C.
(3.) The learned trial court has rejected the said T.I. Application by finding that prima facie no case was made out by the plaintiffs for grant of such T.I. on the ground that the said deceased Pyare Lal had executed a registered adoption deed adopting the said Ram Kumar dated 26.9.2008. The learned trial court has also noticed in para 8 that from the preamble of the sale deed dated 25.2.2009 in question it appears prima facie that sale of agricultural land in favour of the respondent No.1 - Girdwari Devi was valid because her husband Surender Kumar working in PHED Department had sufficient fund available around that day to purchase the property in question. He had taken a loan from PHED Department on 29.2.2009 to the tune of Rs.1,25,000/- and had also received Rs.1,91,000/- on 9.7.2007 and 10.9.2007 respectively on account of sale of one of his plots of land. The said Pyare Lal is stated to have expired on 3.5.2009 after about 3 months of the sale deed in question. The learned trial court also found that the said defendant had produced a ration card No.652 dated 12.8.1993 which showed the said Ram Kumar to be son of the said deceased Pyare Lal. The learned trial court also proceeded on the assumption that the registered adoption deed dated 24.9.2008 was not under challenge in the said suit and, therefore, the present plaintiffs did not have any locus standi to challenge the registered sale deed dated 25.2.2009 executed by the said Pyare Lal prior to his death in favour of the said Ram Kumar adopted son and Girdawari Devi daughter of Ram Kumar.;