1/2 S.B.CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.174/2009 (Mohd.Ayub vs. Abdul Aziz & anr.) DATE OF ORDER : 13/7/2009 HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr.R.R.Nagori, for the appellant. Mr.Harish Purohit, for the respondent. This appeal is directed against the order of learned trial court dated 24/1/2009, whereby, application under Order 39 Rule 1 CPC filed by the plaintiff appellant was rejected by the learned appellate court. Learned counsel for the respondent Mr. Harish Purohit submits that after the rejection of temporary injunction application, the respondents have completed the construction in question, however, he undertakes that suit property in question shall not be alienated by the defendant-respondents. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that observations made by the learned trial court while deciding the T.I. application should not affect the trial as certain findings are likely to go against the appellant-plaintiff. It is needless to say that findings or observations given at the time of deciding the T.I. application do not bind the learned trail court and final adjudication of the suit depend upon the evidence led by the parties and arguments addressed by the 2/2 parties or counsel. In view of the undertaking of respondent-defendants that they will not alienate the suit property further during the pendency of the suit, to this extent the impugned order stands modified and defendants are directed not to further alienate the suit property and no further construction shall be raised by the respondent-defendants during the pendency of the suit. The appeal is disposed of. (DR.VINEET KOTHARI), J. item no.s-3 baweja/-