A court's interim order restraining alienation of property can be modified to maintain status-quo until suit disposal.

JUDGMENT

This appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(r) of the CPC is filed by the plaintiff in O.S.No.2776/2021 before the LII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore, challenging the order dated 8.10.2021 passed on I.A.No.1 filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC and I.A.No.2 filed under Order 39 Rule 4 read with Section 151 of CPC, whereby the Trial Court has dismissed I.A.No.1 filed by the plaintiff and allowed I.A.No.2 filed by the defendants and exparte interim order dated 22.4.2021 has been vacated.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Trial Court.

3. The plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.2776/2021 before the Trial Court seeking for relief of partition and separate possession in the suit schedule property. Along with the suit, the plaintiff had also filed I.A.No.1 under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC seeking for grant of an order of temporary injunction restraining the defendant Nos.1 to 7 from alienating item Nos.1 and 2 of suit schedule property. The Trial Court had granted exparte interim order on 22.4.2021. On service of summons, defendants appeared through counsel and filed written statements. The defendants filed I.A.No.2 for vacating the exparte interim order. After hearing the parties, the Trial Court by order dated 8.10.2021 dismissed I.A.No.1 filed by the plaintiff and allowed I.A.No.2 filed by the defendants and interim order dated 22.4.2021 was vacated. Being aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff has filed this appeal.

4. This court on 19.11.2021 granted interim order restraining the respondents from alienating the suit schedule property till the next date of hearing. Thereafter, the interim order was extended from time to time and the same is operating till today.

5. The learned counsel for the respondents- defendants submitted that this court has granted interim order only restraining the respondents from alienating the suit schedule property. The appellant-plaintiff taking advantage of the same, is trying to interfere with the defendants’ peaceful possession of the property.

6. The learned counsel for the appellant-plaintiff submitted that appellant has not disputed the possession of defendants in respect of item No.2 of the suit schedule property.

7. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

8. Considering the above submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and in the interest of justice, the only order that can be passed at this stage is to direct the parties not to alienate the suit schedule property, till the disposal of the suit.

9. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.

The impugned order dated 8.10.2021 passed by the trial court is modified. Both the parties are directed to maintain status-quo in respect of possession of the suit schedule property and further parties are directed not to alienate the suit schedule property, till the disposal of the suit.

The Trial Court is directed to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible, not later than one year from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Parties are directed to co-operate for the early disposal of the suit.

In view of disposal of appeal, all pending I.As. are dismissed accordingly.