Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Smt.Jamila Begam And Others v. Mahak Singh And Others - WRIT - C No. 22452 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 8367 (25 April 2006)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court No. 23

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 22452 of 2006

Smt. Jamila Begam & others Vs. Mahak Singh & others

Hon'ble Umeshwar Pandey, J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This petition challenges the order of the trial court as well as the appellate court whereby the petitioners-plaintiffs' application for temporary injunction has been partly allowed. The application with regard to plot No. 501 was allowed by the trial court but the prayer relating to plot No. 418 was dismissed.

Plot No. 418 is a subject matter of an agreement of sale executed by the petitioners predecessor in title - Wasi Ullah in favour of the respondents-defendants. Later on, in pursuance to this agreement the sale deed was executed and that has been given effect by recording mutation of names of the defendants-respondents over the said plot. It is on this basis only the courts below have not found it a proper case for grant of temporary injunction relating to said plot No. 418 in favour of the plaintiffs petitioners.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the sale deed is in-genuine and by means of misrepresentation and otherwise by creating influence over the vendor Wasi Ullah, the sale deed was obtained and on this ground itself it has been challenged in a suit for its cancellation. No cognizance of that sale deed should have been taken by the courts below.

In the aforesaid facts and other materials available on record, it is found that the sale deed with regard to plot No. 418 is there in favour of respondents defendants and that sale deed has been duly recognised by the authorities at the time of mutation of names of the respondents over the said plot. As such, the genuineness of the sale deed obtained by the respondents by Wasi Ullah is not questionable at this stage so long as it exists. It would be a different matter if the said sale deed is cancelled in the suit by the court, which is pending before it. But before the sale deed is cancelled it remains to be a genuine document to be duly taken cognizance of by the courts. Therefore, at this stage the court cannot ignore that sale deed and pass otherwise order in favour of the petitioners plaintiffs.

In the aforesaid view of the matter, the petition does not appear to have any force and is hereby dismissed. The hearing of the suit be expedited.




Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.