1. We think that this appeal against the grant of a temporary injunction has to be allowed on the short ground that the Civil Procedure Code does not authorise the grant of an injunction in the circumstances of the case.

2. The suit in which the injunction has been granted was one instituted by the three sons of the manager of a joint Hindu family governed by the principles of Mitakshara law. It was for partition of their three-fourths share in the joint family property. The suit was filed on 16-10-1957, but the entire property had already been sold on 16-9-1957 in execution of a mortgage decree against the father in his capacity as manager of the family. The sale was confirmed on 20-10-1957. The suit was on the footing that the decree and the sale did not bind the plaintiffs since the mortgage debt incurred by their father was an avyavaharika debt and the decree-holder and auction-purchaser were made parties to the suit being impleaded as defendants 3 and 5 respectively. On 18-10-1957 the plaintiffs came forward with the present application stated to be under Order XXXIX R.1, C. P. C. praying for a temporary injunction to restrain the 5th defendant auction-purchaser fro