Case brief
What is this about?
FMA 187 of 2026 (with CAN 1 of 2026), decided 17.02.2026: appeal against refusal of temporary injunction in a declaration suit challenging a hibanama (Schedule 'kha' property); Trial Judge doubted oral hiba due to intervening 1982 solenama decree; appeal withdrawn by appellants (hibanama claimed to be of 1990, not 1970) and dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to renew injunction prayer upon amendment of plaint; Bench: Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J. and Supratim Bhattacharya, J.; no order as to costs; withdrawal without prejudice – useful on liberty to renew interim-relief prayers after plaint amendment.
What did the court decide?
Appeal dismissed as withdrawn at the appellants' own prayer, without deciding the injunction issue; liberty effectively preserved to renew the prayer for injunction upon amendment of the plaint incorporating the appropriate date of the hibanama; CAN 1 of 2026 disposed of accordingly; no order as to costs.