D. M. DHARMADHIKARI, J.

( 1 ) THIS second appeal is by the defendants, against whom a decree of mandatory injunction has been granted by the two Courts below.

( 2 ) ADMITTEDLY, the appellants are members of a coparcenery. The respondent (plaintiffs) by registered sale deed dated 13/5/1981 (Ex. P/1) purchased from the appellant No. 1, Maharu, the alleged manager of the coparcenery, two acres of land out of khasra No. 5/1-k total area 7. 39 acres. The plaintiffs as purchasers claimed to have been placed in possession of the lands purchased by them. The cause of action for the suit was said to have been arisen because the defendants (i. e. appellants Nos. 2 to 4), under a claim that the property was an undivided coparcenery property, tried to take forcible possession of the lands from the plaintiffs/purchasers. The two Courts below held that the purchasers' possession can be protected by grant of a decree of mandatory injunction.

( 3 ) FOR the purpose of this second appeal facts which are not in dispute, and on which the findings of the two Courts are conclusive as binding, are that the suit lands form part of a joint coparcenery property consisting of the appellants as its members. Th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document