Balram Singh Thakur v. Seema Thakur
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court, Chhattisgarh, disposed of a writ petition challenging a temporary injunction order. The Court confirmed the injunction against the petitioner interfering with the respondent's possession but modified it to prohibit alienation or creation of third-party interests during the civil suit.
What did the court decide?
Impugned orders confirmed with modification preventing alienation of property or creating third-party interest during civil suit pendency.
What the court decided
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
W.P.(227) No.494 of 2021
- Balram Singh Thakur S/o Ishwar Singh Thakur Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Geedha, Tahsil And District Mungeli (Chhattisgarh)
- ---- Petitioner
Versus
- Seema Thakur W/o Balram Singh Thakur Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Geedha, Tahsil And District Mungeli (Chhattisgarh)
- State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, Mungeli, District Mungeli (Chhattisgarh)
---- Respondents
| For Petitioner | – Mr. Rajkumar Pali, Advocate. |
|---|---|
| For Respondent No.01 | – Mr. Soumya Rai and Mr. Ankur |
| Kashyap, Advocates. | |
| For State | – Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, Panel Lawyer. |
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order granting temporary injunction under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 CPC against interfering in possession of property can be set aside.
Whether the temporary injunction should be modified to prevent alienation of the disputed property during pendency of suit.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Balram Singh Thakur
- respondent
Seema Thakur
- respondent
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, Mungeli
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Chhattisgarh HC
- Decided on
- · December
- Registered
- Case no.
- WP227/494/2021
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court