JUDGMENT :

1. The doctrine of lis pendens is derived from the latin maxim “ut pendent nihil innovetur”, which postulates that during litigation nothing should be changed.

2. In the conceded backdrop of the doctrine, the appellants in this appeal call into question an order of the Trial Court disallowing their application to injunct the defendants in the suit from alienating the plaint schedule properties pending their prayer for its partition.

3. Ineluctably, this Court has to thus examine whether the challenge in this appeal is necessary when the properties are admittedly modulated by the principles of lis pendens and if the impugned order would cause any legal prejudice to the appellants or affect their claims over them.

4. Plaintiffs 1 and 3 in a suit for partition have come up in this appeal challenging the order of the Trial Court declining to allow their application filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'the CPC'), whereby they had sought an injunction against the defendants from dealing with and alienating the plaint schedule properties.

5. The appellants say that even without appreciating the facts involved in its proper perspective, the Trial