SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 9867

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr.Justice P. DHANABAL
Yamunarani T and 2 others – Appellant
Versus
K. Hari Babu and 3 OTHERS – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 09-02-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL OA No. 1009 of 2025 in C.S.No.246 of 2025

1. Yamunarani T

2. Hanisha Tumati

3. Keerthisha Tumati ..Applicants Vs

1. K. Hari Babu

2. K.Ramesh Babu

3. K.Prabhakar

4. The Sub-Registrar Sub-Registrar Office Anna Nagar, Nolambur 2nd Main Road, Nolambur Phase-II Chennai-600 037 ..Respondents This Application is filed under Order XIV Rule 8 of Original Side Rules read with under Order XXXIX, Rule 1 and 2 of CPC, to grant interim injunction restraining the Respondents 1, 2 and 3 from in anyway creating any encumbrance in the schedule mentioned property, till the disposal of the above suit.

For Applicants: Ms.D.Selvakumari For Respondents: Mr.R.Vigneswaran (R4)

Ms.M.Vishali for Mr.K.Govi Ganesan (R1)

R2 and R3 (No appearance)

ORDER

This Application has been filed praying for a grant of interim injunction restraining the respondents 1,2 and 3 from any way creating any encumbrance in the schedule mentioned property, till the disposal of the above suit.

2. According to the applicants, they are the plaintiffs in the suit filed for declaration and permanent injunction. The applicants are the owners of the suit schedule property. The respondents 1 to 3 have no right or title over the said property, however, they are making an attempt to alienate and encumber the suit schedule property. It is further stated that if any 3rd party right is created, it will affect the rights of the plaintiff with respect to suit schedule property.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. There is no representation for the respondents 2 and 3. The learned counsel appearing for R1 and R4 have stated no objection for allowing this application.

4. Considering the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of this application and considering the fact that if any 3rd party right is created with respect to suit schedule property, the plaintiffs right will be affected, this application is allowed.

09-02-2026 arr (1/2)

To The Sub-Registrar Sub-Registrar Office Anna Nagar, Nolambur 2nd Main Road, Nolambur Phase-II Chennai-37 P.DHANABAL, J.

arr in C.S.No.246 of 2025

09-02-2026

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top