ORDER

1. The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 22.09.2022 whereby an application preferred by the respondentplaintiff under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure had been allowed.

2. The case of the appellant-defendant is that the suit preferred by the respondent-plaintiff for specific performance of contract was based on a document which was forged.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant-defendant submitted that an FIR was registered qua the said transaction and in the criminal investigation, the FSL report qua the signatures on the agreement to sell in question was procured by the investigating officer. According to the FSL report, the signatures on the alleged agreement to sell were not of the defendant and therefore, the learned trial Court ought not to have granted injunction in favour of the plaintiff.

4. A perusal of the order impugned shows that the relief as granted by the trial Court in favour of the plaintiff is only to the extent that the defendant has been restrained from transferring the property in question or creating any right on the property in question.

5. No injunction regarding the usage of the property has been granted by the trial