Dismissed

Haji Imran and 3 Others v. Smt. Kamar Zamani and 9 Others

Allahabad HC6 Dec 2018A227/9023/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 227, the High Court dismissed the challenge to an order granting temporary injunction. The court held that no justification existed to interfere with the appellate court's factual finding regarding a will establishing the plaintiff's mother's rights over the suit property.

What did the court decide?

The petition challenging the temporary injunction order was dismissed.

Haji Imran and 3 Others Vs Smt. Kamar Zamani and 9 Others — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 36

¶2

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 9023 of 2018 Petitioner :- Haji Imran And 3 Others Respondent :- Smt. Kamar Zamani And 9 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Agarwal,Sandeep Kumar Srivastava

¶3

Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.

¶4

The present petition has been filed by four petitioners who are defendants in Original Suit No. 57 of 2016. Out of four petitioners, only petitioner no. 2 has filed a written statement being defendant no. 6 in the said suit, claiming his exclusive right over the suit property on the basis of a will allegedly executed by his maternal uncle namely Mohd. Zaha son of Haji Imran. Rest of the petitioners have not put in appearance as on date in the suit. As such, they cannot be allowed to join in the present petition so as to assail the order of temporary injunction granted by the first appellate court.

¶5

In so far as the claim of petitioner/defendant no. 6 is concerned, a categorical finding has been recorded by the appellate court in the order impugned that by mere reading of the Will namely paper no. '99 Ga', allegedly executed in favour of the petitioners with regard to the suit property described in Schedule A of the plaint, it is evident that the plaintiff's mother Smt. Hasina Khatoon (wife of Haji Abdul Hamid) had a right in the suit property.

¶6

The injunction order granted by the first appellate court is being challenged in the present petition, on the ground that the findings returned by the trial court that the plaintiff had failed to make out a prima facie case by leading cogent evidence for grant of injunction, has not been upturned by the first appellate court.In absence of any evidence lead by the plaintiff, the temporary injunction granted by the first appellate court cannot be sustained.

¶7

Testing this submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, noticing the fact that the suit has been filed by the plaintiff/respondent no. 1 claiming her right in the suit property through her father namely Haji Abdul Hamid, and that the defendant no. 6 is claiming his right to the exclusion of the plaintiff, this Court does not find any justification to interfere in the findings of fact returned by the appellate court on the reading the Will paper no. '99-Ga', placed on record.

¶8

The present petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶9

Order Date :- 6.12.2018/Pratima

Haji Imran and 3 Others v. Smt. Kamar Zamani and 9 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Haji Imran and 3 Others v. Smt. Kamar Zamani and 9 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Arvind Kumar Sharma and Others

Bhartiya Mazdoor Sang U.P. Vs the Presiding Officer Industrial Tribunal (4) and 7 Others

Satyendra Kumar Vs the Family Court and Another

Smt. Jaishri Kesherwani Vs Ashish Kumar Gupta

Nalini Ranjan Srivastava Vs V.N. Rai and Another

Smt. Bhavna Maheshwari Vs Principal Judge Family Court Mathura and Another