JUDGMENT

B.K. PATEL, J. — In this writ application, petitioner has assailed legality of order dated 9.3.2011 passed by the learned District Judge, Khurda at Bhubaneswar in F.A.O. No.110 of 2010 by which order dated 6.10.2010 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bhubaneswar in I.A. No.647 of 2009, arising out of C.S. No.478 of 2009, rejecting petitioner’s application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the C.P.C. for temporary injunction was confirmed.

2.C.S. No.478 of 2009 is a suit for declaration and permanent injunction filed by the plaintiff against opposite party and others. Petitioner is the sole plaintiff and opposite party is the defendant no.1 in the suit. Prayer of the plaintiff in the suit is to:

“a) declare that Natabar Samantray was alive on 17.2.84 and death certificate issued on 1.7.2008, bearing Registration No.288 shown in the Registrar, Birth & Death maintained in the P.H.C., Mendhasal showing date of death as on 10.11.83 of said Natabar Samantray is void under law,

(b) that the defendant no.1 to 18 be permanently restrained from interfering in any way with plaintiff’s possession of the suit lands and from entering upon any part of the same forcibly or from creating any mischief whatsoever in respect of the suit land.”

3.Suit land measuring area of Ac.0.182 decimals is a part of suit plot no.252/1040 under Khata No.105 (total area A.1.225 decimals) originally belonging to late Natabara Samantaray. Plaintiff’s case is that said Natabara Samantaray sold entire land in the suit plot in favour of pro forma defendant Laxmidhar Paikaray by executing Registered Sale Deed dated 17.2.1984. Plaintiff purchased the suit land from said Laxmidhar Paikaray and is in possession on the strength of Registered Sale Deed dated 23.2.1996 executed by power of attorney of pro forma defendant. Defendant nos. 2 to 18 are legal heirs of late Natabar Samantaray. It is alleged that defendant nos. 2 to 18 in connivance with defendant no.1 managed to fraudulently obtain death certificate from Executive Magistrate, Bhubaneswar in Misc. Case No.1946 of 2008 indicating the date of death of late Natabar Samantaray as 10.11.1983 though said Natabara Samantray was alive and did execute sale deed dated 17.2.1984 in favour of pro forma defendant. Thereafter, defendant no.1 attempted to trespass into the suit plot including the suit land which was under peaceful possession of the plaintiff. In I.A. No.647 of 2009 plaintiff made prayer for grant of temporary injunction restraining defendant no.1 from interfering with his possession over and entering into the suit land.

4.Defendant no.1 filed written statement resisting plaintiff’s claim. It is contended that the suit for permanent injunction simpliciter without seeking declaration of right, title and interest over the suit land is not maintainable. Disputing the very execution of registered sale deed by late Natabar Samantray in favour of pro forma defendant, it is pleaded that said Natabara Samantray died on 10.11.1983. Plaintiff’s claim to the suit land is thus resisted on the ground, inter alia, that sale deed dated 17.2.1984 purported to have been executed by the said Natabara Samantray in favour of plaintiff’s vendor is a fraudulent and void document. It is asserted that after due enquiry death certificate has been issued to the effect that late Natabara Samantray died on 10.11.83. It is also asserted that defendant no.1 has right, title, interest and possession over the suit land on behalf of successors-in-interest of late Natabara Samantaray by virtue of Registered Power of Attorney dated 9.11.2009.

5.In assailing the orders passed by learned Courts below refusing to issue temporary injunction, it was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the contents of death certificate obtained 25 years after death should not have weighed with the learned Courts below in refusing to protect plaintiff’s right, title and interest over the suit land acquired by