( 1 ) HEARD finally.

( 2 ) APPEAL is directed against an order allowing thereby an application for temporary injunction restraining the defendant/appellant from making construction on the disputed land. Plaintiff/appellant has pleaded that he has been residing in the suit property belonging to Kapil Muni Mahanir-wani panchayti Akhada, Sagar. Earlier, mahant Anant Narayan Puri was the Mahant of the said Akhara who died on 5-6-1988. Plaintiff has stated that he is Mahant of the entire property belonging to the Akhara and has been managing the same since last number of years. Plaintiff has been realizing rent from about 20-25 tenants occupying various rooms belonging to the said Akhara. The suit property is an open piece of land admeasuring 70 ft. x 20 ft. The defendant is trying to occupy the suit property by claiming it and making construction over it. Plaintiff has further pleaded that the defendant has no right to make the construction and is liable to be restrained. Decree for perpetual injunction has been sought by the plaintiff/appellant.

( 3 ) PLAINTIFF/appellant simultaneously with the institution of the suit submitted an application for temporary injunction and prayed for grant of restraint order by way of issuance of temporary injunction.

( 4 ) DEFENDANT/appellant submitted his written statement and also replied to the application for temporary injunction. He specifically contended that the suit property forms part of the property owned by Raj rajeshwar Nagad Narayan Trust. It is contended that the plaintiff is neither Mahant nor is in the management of the said property. It is further submitted that the Court of 1st A. D. J. , Sagar vide its judgment dated 28-10-1996 passed in Civil Suit No. 20a/1996 has directed for registration of Raj rajeshwar Nagad Narayan Trust as a Trust. In pursuance of the same, an application was submitted before S. D. O. /registrar, sagar which was allowed and the said trust was registered as a public trust by virtue of order dated 9-6-1997 passed in Case No. 20b/113, 96-97. It is further submitted that the defendant/appellant is the President of the said trust and is making construction after seeking due permission from the municipal Corporation, Sagar. The amount of rs. 50,000/- 60,000/- has already been spent on the construction, which will not cause inconvenience/prejudice to anyone including the plaintiff. It is specifically contended that plaintiff is neither the owner of the suit property nor is in possession of the same and he is not entitled to a decree for permanent injunction and the suit is liable to be dismissed. A reply was also submitted to the application under Order 39 Rule 1 of civil Procedure Code on almost similar lines.

( 5 ) THE Trial Judge after hearing the arguments allowed the application for permanent injunction and passed an order of temporary injunction. Aggrieved by the same, the defendant/appellant has preferred the present appeal.

( 6 ) LEARNED counsel for the defendant/respondent submitted that public trust in the name of Raj Rajeshwari Nagad Narayan trust was registered in pursuance of the judgment dated 28-10-1996 passed by the court of 1st A. D. J. , Sagar. The said trust was duly registered and the construction on the disputed property is being made by the defendant/appellant as President of the trust after obtaining due permission from the municipal Corporation. Sagar. He further submitted that the plaintiff has no locus standi to challenge the order as the three necessary factors requisite for grant of temporary injunction are not available with the plaintiff/respondent. In reply the learned counsel for the defendant/appellant supported the impugned order.

( 7 ) AFTER considering the arguments and the material on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned order is not sustainable in law and the same is liable to be set aside.

( 8 ) IT be seen that in Paragraph 1 and 2 of the plaint, that the plaintiff has pleaded that Kapil Muni wa

Click Here to Read the rest of this document