IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (1) CR-8319-2025 and CR-8366-2025 Judgment Reserved On 16.01.2026 Judgment pronounced on 28.01.2026 SANJAY KUMAR AND ANOTHER ....PETITIONERS VERSUS DHARAMJIT SINGH MAKKAR AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARMOD GOYAL Present: Mr. Sherry K. Singla, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. M.S. Khaira, Senior Advocate with Mr. Jaswinder Singh, Advocate for respondent No. 1.

***

PARMOD GOYAL, J.

1. The petitioners-plaintiffs, Sanjay Kumar and another, are aggrieved by the impugned order dated 09.10.2025 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ludhiana, whereby the appeals preferred by respondent–defendant Dharamjit Singh Makkar were allowed and the order dated 30.04.2024 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana granting temporary injunction in favour of the petitioners under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, was set aside and the injunction granted by the Court of first instance was vacated.

2. The plaintiffs-petitioners, Sanjay Kumar and another, had filed a suit for declaration claiming that they are owners in possession of the suit property on the basis of a registered sale deed dated 23.03.2023. They further sought a declaration that the sale deed dated 03.03.2010 in favour of defendant Dharamjit Singh Makkar does not pertain to the suit property and has no effect on the rights of the plaintiffs. Along with the relief of declaration, the plaintiffs also sought a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering in their peaceful possession of the suit property. Along with the suit, the plaintiffs also filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC seeking grant of temporary injunction to restrain the defendants from dispossessing them from the suit property during the pendency of the suit.

3. The said suit was contested by defendant Dharamjit Singh Makkar, who claimed ownership of the suit property on the basis of a registered sale deed dated 03.03.2010, allegedly executed in his favour by Jaswinder Singh Rai. It was further asserted that the plaintiffs are claiming rights on the basis of a sale deed dated 23.03.2023, allegedly executed by their vendor on the strength of an earlier sale deed dated 11.11.1994, which is forged, fabricated, and fictitious, purportedly executed by Lakhwinder Singh. 4. Respondent–Dharamjit Singh Makkar (defendant in suit filed by Sanjay and another) also instituted a suit for declaration claiming himself to be the owner of the suit property measuring 200 square yards on the basis of a registered sale deed dated 03.03.2010. He further sought a declaration that the sale deed dated 23.01.2023, allegedly executed by Lakhwinder Singh on the basis of a forged and fabricated sale deed dated 11.11.1994, is illegal, null and void and has no effect on his rights. In addition thereto, he sought a decree of mandatory injunction directing the defendants therein to demolish the construction raised over the suit property, as well as a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendant–petitioner from raising any further construction or from alienating the suit property. The respondent–Dharamjit Singh Makkar also filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC seeking grant of temporary injunction.

5. Both the applications-one filed by the petitioners–plaintiffs Sanjay Kumar and another in Civil Suit No. 22341 of 2023 and the other filed by respondent Dharamjit Singh Makkar in his suit were decided by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana vide order of even date i.e.

30.04.2024.

6. Vide order dated 30.04.2024, the application preferred by the petitioners–plaintiffs Sanjay Kumar and another was allowed, whereas the application filed by respondent Dharamjit Singh Makkar was dismissed in respective suits. Temporary injunction was granted in favour of the petitioners after recording a finding that they were in possession of the suit property.

7. Aggrieved by the order dated 30.0