- (1.) : Both the appeals are being disposed of by this common order. These appeals have been filed against the order dated 13.8.2008, whereby the prayer made on behalf of the plaintiff and defendant No. 6 for injunction were refused by the learned trial court. Mr. Anwar, learned senior counsel, appearing for the defendant No.6 -appellant in M.A. No. 313 of 2008 pointed out to the conduct of defendants 3, 4, 15 and 17. He submitted that during pendency of this Partition Suit the said defendants have been selling lands. He further submitted that in spite of order of status quo granted on 19.11.2008, the said defendants sold the lands. By producing a copy of the Police report dated 24.3.2009, he further submitted that the said defendants have been making construction in
(2.) SPITE of the order of status quo. In this way he submitted that the said defendants have got no respect to the law and the orders passed by this Court. Mr. Manjul Prasad, learned senior counsel, appearing on behalf of said defendants/respondents, submitted that the petition for injunction was filed in the year 2001 but the same was moved only in the year 2008. He further submitted that in the impugned order, the sale of lands during pendency of the suit has been noted and it is observed that the same will be guided by the principle of lis pendence. He further submitted that the said defendants had no knowledge about the order dated 19.11.2008 when they sold lands on 20.11.2008. He submitted that the said Police report has not been brought on record by affidavit and therefore he is not in a position to deny and dispute the said allegation. However, on instruction, he submitted that the said defendants were not making construction; rather the purchasers were making construction. Be that as it may. The parties agreed that this partition suit of 1993 should be disposed of expeditiously. They also agreed to cooperate the learned trial court in early disposal of the suit. Mr. Shivnath, learned senior counsel, appearing for the plaintiff/ appellant in M.A. No. 350 of 2008, informs that plaintiffs evidence is going to be closed soon. In view of the order, I intend to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to the non appearing parties in these two appeals. Without going into the merits of the case, these two appeals are being disposed of with a direction to the parties to cooperate in early Disposal of the suit and not to take unnecessary adjournments. The trial court will try to dispose of the suit as early as possible and preferably within six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Till the Disposal of the suit, the parties will maintain status quo as on today with regard to suit properties. It is made further clear that the parties will not transfer the suit property in any manner and no construction/alteration of any type will be made by them on the suit property. Mr. Shivnath undertakes to produce a copy of this order in the trial court. Let a copy of this order be handed over to him for producing the same in the trial court on an early date. With these observations and directions, these appeals are disposed of. ;