- (1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the appellant aggrieved against order dated 22.05.2013 passed by the learned trial court, whereby, his application under Order XXXIX, Rule 1 and 2 CPC has been rejected. However, a direction was given to respondent No.1 to maintain the accounts of the firm till the disposal of the suit.
(2.) THE facts in brief are that the appellant filed a suit for declaration, dissolution of partnership firm, rendition of accounts and injunction against the respondents, inter alia, with the averments that a mining licence was granted in his favour and he entered into a partnership with respondent No.1. The partner- ship firm did not do any effective work till 2002 and from 2002 onwards the excavation started on the licenced mine; on 18.09.2011, the appellant and his son went to the mining site and inquired about the excavated material; when respondent No.2 Thana Ram informed him that he has been inducted in the partnership firm and that the plaintiff has since retired from the partnership, licence stands transferred in the name of the partnership firm. The said information was claimed as a cause of action for filing the suit. Alongwith the suit an application seeking temporary injunction was also filed, inter alia, seeking injunction against the respondent Nos.1 and 2 from excavating from the mine and not to transfer the licence further. The respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 filed reply to the application seeking temporary injunction as well as written statement and allegations made in the plaint and the temporary injunction application were denied.
(3.) THE learned trial court after hearing the parties came to the prima facie conclusion that whether the new partnership deed dated 04.05.2002 was a forged and concocted document is a disputed question, which could be decided after the trial. The learned trial court relying on the First Information Report dated 20.10.2011 lodged by the plaintiff wherein it was indicated by the plaintiff that 'the mining licence was got transferred in the name of M/s Balaji Stone Suppliers (Partnership Firm) by respondent No.1 Taja Ram by taking him into confidence and by putting undue pressure on account of his relationship with him', came to the conclusion that the said aspect prima faice indicates the execution of the document and whether the same was on account of undue pressure or not would be decided during the course of the trial.;