Arun Bhansali, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the order dated 9.2.2016 sassed by the Trial Court, whereby, the Trial Court has partly allowed the application filed by the appellants under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 C.P.C.
(2.) The appellants and respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are real sisters. The present suit was filed seeking cancellation of sale deeds and permanent injunction, regarding the sale deeds executed by Smt. Umi Devi in favour of respondent Nos. 4 and 5 and further transfers in favour of respondent Nos. 6 and 7. Several allegations were made in the plaint against Smt. Nathi Devi and her husband and it was claimed that the transfers took place without consideration and the appellants became aware of such transfers only after the death of their mother on 23.1.2014. Along with the suit, an application was filed seeking injunction against mutation of agricultural land and seeking injunction regarding mining activities in Khasra No. 193.
(3.) The application was resisted by the respondents by filing reply. It was submitted that the entire land was owned by Umi Devi and she was entitled to transfer the land, Jai Prakash S/o Nathi Devi was adopted by Umi Devi and the transfers took place way back in the year 2005 onwards and, therefore, there is no reason for the plaintiffs to now challenge the said transfers, qua the mining activities in Khasra No. 193, it was submitted that Purnaram purchased the land ad measuring 7 Bigha on 20.7.2005 and out of 7 Bigha land, 10,000 sq. mtrs. land has been applied for mining purposes and mining rights were obtained, regarding which M.L. No. 561 dated 1.8.2005 is in favour of Purnaram and the mine is being worked, which is in the knowledge of plaintiffs. Submissions were made regarding rest of the land and denying the right of the plaintiffs in seeking injunction.;