IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION),SANGRUR.

------
1.Manjit Singh, 2.Paramjit Singh sons of Gurdial Singh,
3. Gurmail Kaur Wd/o of Gurdial Singh both
R/o opposite Tehsil Complex, Bhawanigarh, Tehsil &
Distt. Sangrur
Plaintiffs
Versus
1.Jagdev Kaur Wife of Sukhdev Singh son og Chotta
singh r/o ward no.2 Back side of Hospital of Dr. Vijay
Khoshla, Patiala Road, Bhawanigarh, Tehsil & Distt.
Sangrur.
2.Kaushlya Devi wife of Jagdish Rai son Brij Lal R/o
Village Nagra, Tehsil & Distt. Sangrur.
Defendants

Suit for permanent injunction restraining the

defendants No.1&2 not to raise any type of

construction in the land comprised of khewat

No.349/334, khatauni NO. 489, killa No. 101//4/2

min [4-4], 101//5/2[2-10], 101//5/3[3-0], total 9-

14 situated within the revenue estate of village

Bhawanigarh, Tehsil & Distt. Sangrur vide

Jamabandi for the year 2008-09.

Sir,

The plaintiffs submit as under:-

1. That the plaintiffs are owner in joint

possession to the extent of 1/30 share each of the land

detailed in the heading of the plaint alongwith some

other land.

2. That the suit land is situated near the

abadi area of Village Bhawanigarh and the suit land is

2

of more commercial value then the other Joint land of

the parties.

3. That the defendant no. 1 has purchased

200/1800 share and defendant no. 2 has purchased

400/1800 share of the land measuring 30 Kanal including

the suit land vide sale deed dated 8/6/2010. The

defendant with the intention to raise construction and

to get possession of specific area has got the sides

mentioned in the sale deed. It is specifically

mentioned in the sale deed the purchaser has got the

property to East: 25 feet street, west: remaining land

of the vender, North: Street 16 feet, south: workshop

of sukhdev Singh who is husband of defendant no.1. The

defendant no. 1 has intentionally got dimensions

mentioned in the sale deed to raise construction.

4. That the Property is joint, the Gurbux

singh has no right to give possession of specific area

to his vendee . It is settled Law that vendor cannot

transfer a better title then he him self has. The

defendants are nothing but co-shares of the entire 30

kanal land.

5. That the defendant no.1 and 2 wants to

raise construction in the suit without getting the same

partitioned.

6. That the plaintiffs have 1/30th share each

in the suit and has the right to restrain the

defendants not to raise construction in the entire

3

property without getting the joint property

partitioned.

7. That the defendants with malafide

intention to cause loss to the plaintiffs, out of

greed wants to raise construction in the more

commercial value area for which they have no right.

8. That the defendants have no right to raise

construction without getting the joint property

partitioned from the competent court.

9. That the plaintiffs requested the

defendants No.1&2 not to raise any type of construction

in the property in dispute without getting the

partition and not to change the nature of land in

dispute, but the defendants refused to the request of

the plaintiffs. The defendants have collected

construction material at the spot and are threatening

to raise construction in the land in dispute.

10. That the cause of action to file the suit

arose to the plaintiffs from the above said bundle of

facts and from the threat and refusal of the

defendants.

11. That the property in dispute is situated

at Bhawanigarh, Tehsil & Distt. Sangrur and this

Hon'ble Court has got jurisdiction to try and decide

the suit.

12. That value of the suit for the purpose of

court fee and jurisdiction is Rs. 130/- for the purpose

of injunction and Rs. 50/- is affixed on the plaint.

4

13. That the same subject matter suit is

neither pending nor has been decided in any competent

court. But the plaintiffs have filed a suit for

permanent injunction against the Gurbux Singh etc.

14. That the vakalatanama, Talwana, address

sheet, affidavit, duplicate copy of the plaint are

attached herewith.

It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that

the suit of the plaintiffs may kindly be decreed for

permanent injunction restraining the defendants No.1&2

not to raise any type of construction in the land

comprised of khewat No.349/334, khatauni NO. 489, killa

No. 101//4/2 min [4-4], 101//5/2[2-10], 101//5/3[3-0],

total 9-14 situated within the revenue estate of

village Bhawanigarh, Tehsil & Distt. Sangrur vide

Jamabandi for the year 2008-09. in favour of plaintiffs

and against the defendants. Any other relief to which

the plaintiffs are found entitled or the court may deem

fit may also be granted.

June 17, 2010 Submitted by:-

1.Manjit Singh, 2.Paramjit
Singh sons of Gurdial Singh,3.
Gurmail kaur wd/o of gurdial
Singh both R/o opposite Tehsil
Complex, Bhawanigarh, Tehsil &
Distt. Sangrur.
Plaintiffs

Through counsel

VERIFICATION
It is verified that the contents of plaint
from para no.1 to 9 are true and correct to my
5

knowledge and remaining para are true and correct to my

belief. Verified at Sangrur on 17.6.2010

Plaintiffs

IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION),SANGRUR.

------
1.Manjit Singh, 2.Paramjit Singh sons of Gurdial

Singh,3. Gurmail Kaur Wd/o Gurdial singh both R/o

opposite Tehsil Complex, Bhawanigarh, Tehsil & Distt.

Sangrur.

Plaintiffs/applicants

Versus

1.Jagdev Kaur Wife of Sukhdev Singh son og Chotta

singh r/o ward no.2 Back side of Hospital of Dr. Vijay
Khoshla, Patiala Road, Bhawanigarh, Tehsil & Distt.
Sangrur.
2.Kaushlya Devi wife of Jagdish Rai son Brij Lal R/o
Village Nagra, Tehsil & Distt. Sangrur.
Defendants/Respondents

Suit for permanent injunction.

---------

Application U/o 39 rule 1&2 read with section 151

CPC restraining the defendants No.1&2 not to raise

any type of construction in the land comprised of

khewat No.349/334, khatauni NO. 489, killa No.

101//4/2 min [4-4], 101//5/2[2-10], 101//5/3[3-0],

total 9-14 situated within the revenue estate of

village Bhawanigarh, Tehsil & Distt. Sangrur vide

Jamabandi for the year 2008-2009. till the

decision of the case.

6

Sir,

The plaintiffs/Applicants submit as under:-

1. That the plaintiffs have filed a suit in this

Hon`ble Court, which is most likely to succeed. The

averments made in the plaint may be read as a part of

this application.

2. That the plaintiffs are owner in joint possession to

the extent of 1/30 share each of the land detailed in

the heading of the plaint alongwith some other land.

3. That the suit land is situated near the abadi area

of Village Bhawanigarh and the suit land is of more

commercial value then the other Joint land of the

parties.

4. That the defendant no. 1 has purchased 200/1800

share and defendant no. 2 has purchased 400/1800 share

of the land measuring 30 Kanal including the suit land

vide sale deed dated 8/6/2010. The defendant with the

intention to raise construction and to get possession

of specific area has got the sides mentioned in the

sale deed. It is specifically mentioned in the sale

deed the purchaser has got the property to East: 25

feet street, west: remaining land of the vender, North:

Street 16 feet, south: workshop of sukhdev Singh who is

husband of defendant no.1. The defendant no. 1 has

intentionally got dimensions mentioned in the sale deed

to raise construction.

5. That the Property is joint, the Gurbux singh has no

right to give possession of specific area to his vendee

7

. It is settled Law that vendor cannot transfer a

better title then he him self has. The defendants are

nothing but co-shares of the entire 30 kanal land.

6. That the defendant no.1 and 2 wants to raise

construction in the suit without getting the same

partitioned.

7. That the plaintiffs have 1/30th share each in the

suit and has the right to restrain the defendants not

to raise construction in the entire property without

getting the joint property partitioned.

8. That the defendants with malafide intention to cause

loss to the plaintiffs, out of greed wants to raise

construction in the more commercial value area for

which they have no right.

9. That the defendants have no right to raise

construction without getting the joint property

partitioned from the competent court.

10. That the plaintiffs requested the defendants

No.1&2 not to raise any type of construction in the

property in dispute without getting the partition and

not to change the nature of land in dispute, but the

defendants refused to the request of the plaintiffs.

The defendants have collected construction material at

the spot and are threatening to raise construction in

the land in dispute.

11. That there is a good prima facie case and balance

of convenience also lies in favour of

plaintiffs/applicants.
8

12. That in case, the defendants/respondent succeed in

their evil motive, the plaintiffs/applicants will

suffer an irreparable loss.

It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that

the application may kindly be allowed and defendants/

respondent No.1&2 be restrained not to raise any type

of construction in the land comprised of khewat

No.349/334, khatauni NO. 489, killa No. 101//4/2 min

[4-4], 101//5/2[2-10], 101//5/3[3-0], total 9-14

situated within the revenue estate of village

Bhawanigarh, Tehsil & Distt. Sangrur vide Jamabandi for

the year 2008-2009. till the decision of the case.

June 17, 2010 Submitted by:-

1.Manjit Singh, 2.Paramjit

Singh sons of Gurdial Singh,3.
Gurmail Kaur W/d of Gurdial
Singh both R/o opposite Tehsil
Complex, Bhawanigarh, Tehsil &
Distt. Sangrur.
Plaintiffs/Applicants

Through counsel