BHATTACHARYA, J.

(1.) This First Miscellaneous Appeal is at the instance of the defendant No. 1 in a suit for declaration, injunction and recovery of damages and is directed against Order No. 23 dated 16th March, 2006 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, 4th Court, Alipore, District - 24 Parganas (South), in Title Suit No. 19 of 2004, thereby allowing an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by the plaintiffs for restraining the defendants from disposing of or encumbering the movable and immovable properties mentioned in schedule C of the plaint till the disposal of the suit.

(2.) Being dissatisfied, the defendant No. 1 has come up with the present appeal.

(3.) The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 as plaintiffs filed in the 4th Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Alipore, a suit being Title Suit No. 19 of 2004 thereby praying for the following relief:- a) "A preliminary decree for Rs. 20,00,000/-(Rupees Twenty lacs) only against the defendants for damaging the house property at premises No. 2, Dr. Rajendra Road described in Schedule A; b) Order appointing an Engineer Commissioner-cum-Valuer for ascertaining the extent of damages and the estimated cost for repairing the house property at premises No. 2, Dr. Rajendra Road, for making it safe and secure. After ascertainment of cost, a Final Decree for damages on ascertained amount be passed on payment of additional Court Fees, if necessary ; c) Decree for declaration that the stock-in-trade of the foreign liquor shop in the trade name of M/s. M. L. Shaw and Company, run by the defendants at premises No. 15, Ashutosh Mukherjee Road, P.S. Bhowanipore, Kolkata -700 020 and the ancestral house of the defendants at premises No. 83, Dharmatola Street (Lenin Sarani), P.S. - Taltola, Kolkata -700 013 as first charge towards satisfaction of the amount to be decreed in the suit ; d) Decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men and agents from selling out their stock-in-trade and the house property described in Schedule C until the decretal amount is satisfied ; e) All costs of the suit ; f) Any other relief or reliefs to which the plaintiffs are entitled to in law and in equity."

(4.) The case made out by the plaintiffs may be summed up thus :- a) One Smt. Mrinalini Devi was the absolute owner of the suit property being No. 2,Or. Rajendra Road. The said Smt. Mrinalini Devi executed a deed of family settlement/trust thereby providing that after her death, her son, namely, Ramananda Mukherjee, would be the sole trustee. On the death of Mrinalini Devi on 21st January, 1991, the said Ramananda Mukherjee became trustee in respect of the house property mentioned above. bj The said Ramananda Mukherjee as trustee sold away to the plaintiffs the entire house property at 2, Dr. Rajendra Road comprising land measuring 2 cottah a little or more with a more than 100 years old dilapidated two-storied building by executing and registering conveyance on 19th May, 1997. The said property is described in schedule A of the plaint. c) The defendants are the tenants-in-common in respect of the entire two-storied building at premises No. 2, Dr. Rajendra Road save and except a 100 sq. feet road-side-shop-room. The tenancy of the defendants is specifically described in schedule B of the plaint. d) As the defendants did not use the tenanted part as prudent persons and did not cause necessary repair or take precautionary measure to save the house, for non-repairing of the tenanted part for a considerable period, the old building was lying in a dangerous condition for which the Kolkata Municipal Corporation issued a notice in the year 1987, calling upon the owner and occupier of the house to demolish a part of the building and to secure rest part of it by undertaking suggested extensive repair works. e) The defendants did not pay heed to such notice and when the landlady intended to cause repair pursuant to the notice issued by the