Possession of property and pending suit justified maintaining status quo.

Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J.

1. This appeal is directed against an order passed by the learned 5th Judge, City Civil Court at Calcutta on 8th April. 2011. It appears that the learned Trial Court disposed of the injunction petition filed by the plaintiff under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure and directed the parties to maintain status quo in respect of their respective possession over the suit premises till the disposal of the suit. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said order the defendant/ appellant filed this appeal before this Court.

2. The facts of the case briefly are as follows:-

The plaintiff, the District Grand Lodge of Mark Master Mason of Bengal prayed for a declaration of a suit that he is entitled to use. enjoy, operate. control, manage and administer the eastern hall with adjoining lawn at premises No. 19. Park Street. Calcutta-16 through its appointed operating agent. In the said suit for declaration the plaintiff also prayed for permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, agents and servants from creating or causing any disturbance, obstruction or interference with the plaintiff's free and peaceful enjoyment and full control over the property in question. In the said suit an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been made for an order restraining the defendants, their men and agents and servants from making any obstruction in smooth running of the plaintiff's administration, management, supervision and control over the eastern hall with adjoining lawn of the premises.

3. It is stated by the plaintiff in the said application for injunction that the plaintiff is a registered society duly registered under the Society's Act. II is an association of persons as well as charitable organization and District Grand Master is the head of the association. It is further stated that English Free Masonry is a 300 years old Order spread all over the world with its head office in London. In Bengal, the English and Indian Free Masons are divided into two districts namely Free Mason (Craft) and Free Mason (Mark) headed by District Grand Master. It is further stated that these two districts are two wings of the same order having its head office in London.

4. It is further case of the plaintiff that since inception both the District Free Mason (Mark) and District Free Mason (Craft) in Bengal were being headed by one and single D.G.M. However, in the year 1998 by an internal arrangement the two D.G. Ms were selected for two District Grand Lodges i.e. District Grand Lodge (Mark) and District Grand Lodge (Craft).

5. The defendant No. 1 was appointed as District Grand Master (Craft) of the District Grand Lodge of Bengal. By an internal arrangement and by way of (sic) settlement the portion eastern hall of the building with adjoining lawn is in occupation, management and control of the plaintiff whereas the western hall of the building is under the occupation and management of the District Grand Lodge (Craft) of Bengal. The defendant No. 1 has been appointed as a District Grand Master.

6. It appears that the appellant/respondent filed written objection before the Trial Court and submitted that the plaintiffs and defendant No. 3 are separate organization of masonic order having different parent bodies and origin in England. It is further stated that they have their separate rules and bye laws and the defendant Nos. 3 and 4 are not guided by the plaintiffs organization or any other organization of masonic order. The defendant No. 4, Bengal Free Mason Trust Association (hereinafter referred to as the 'B.F.T.A.') is a company registered under section 25 of the Companies Act created by D.G.M. and upon whom all assets, land, building etc. at 19. Park Street have been vested. B.F.T.A. operates as trustee to look after the interest of the members of the craft bodies and not the bodies under Mark Master Mason. It is further stated that District G