1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS (ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION) THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2011 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K.SHARMA O.A.No.1002 OF 2010 IN C.S.No.649 of 2010 1. V.Vaidyanathan, First Floor, No.65/33, Royapettah High Road, Chennai-600 014. 2. V.Ramakrishnan Ground Floor, No.65/33, Royapettah High Road, Chennai-600 014. ... Applicants/Plaintiffs -Versus- V.Rukmani, W/o. Sri.V.Srinivasa Rao, 3rd Floor, No.65/33, Royapettah High Road, Chennai-600 014. ... Respondent/Defendant Original Application praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass an Order of interim injunction, be not passed restraining the Respondent, her men, agents, servants, or any person claiming through or under him in any manner causing any alienation of the property, viz., No.65/33, Royapettah High Road, Chennai-600 014 in any form, pending disposal of the above suit morefully described in the schedule hereunder. This application coming on this day before this court for hearing the court made the following order: This application has been filed by the applicants / https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 plaintiffs for grant of interim injunction, restraining the respondent, her men, agents, servants or any person claiming through or under her in any manner causing any alienation of the property, viz. No.65/33, Royapettah High Road, Chennai in any form, pending disposal of the suit. 2. The case of the applicants / plaintiffs is that the applicants, being sons of K.Viswanathan, are entitled to 2/3rd share in the property, as Thiru K.Viswanathan is said to have died interstate. 3. It is pleaded that arrangement was made between the parties, but was not adhered to subsequently, therefore, the property deserves to be partitioned. 4. Once it is not disputed by the applicants / plaintiffs that the respondent is owner of 1/3rd share in the property, injunction prayed for cannot be granted, as the owner of the property cannot be restrained from dealing with the share in the property. The only restraint is that specific area of the joint property cannot be sold, by a co-sharer. The transfer during pendency of suit is protected under "lis pendens". 5. It is settled law, that the sale of specified area by the co-sharer is deemed to be sale of his share, which is subject to partition. The vendee cannot claim exclusive ownership and is bound by the partition decree. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 6. No prima facie case is made out, for grant of injunction as prayed. No merits. Dismissed. No costs. Sd/-V.K.S.J 17.11.2011 //Certified to be a true copy// Dated this the day of 2012. R.s/20.01.2012 COURT OFFICER From 25.09.2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Order/Judgment Decree in this format. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/