1 ssp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.154 OF 2009 Puran B.Irani & Ors. ...Appellants vs. Banoo A.Irani (Attaie) & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.Tauban F. Irani for the appellants CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN,J. DATE : JULY 19, 2010 P.C.: 1 This Appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned District Judge, Kalyan whereby the learned District Judge allowed the Misc. Civil Appeal against the rejection of the injunction application granted by the learned 11 th Joint Civil Judge(J.D.),Kalyan restraining the Appellant-original defendant temporarily from creating third party interest by way of sale, mortgage, lease etc. in the suit property situated at Titwala, Taluka Kalyan till the disposal of the Regular Civil suit no.224 of 2003. 2 I have heard the Appellant in person. The Appellant points out that plaint was returned for presentation to the proper Court since it was found to be beyond the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Court. Therefore, she states that injunction should not have been granted by the District Judge. 3 In this case the properties undisputedly belonged to one Khodayar Astandiar Irani and the plaintiffs are legal heirs of Aflatoon Irani who was one of the heirs of 2 Khodiyar. Deceased Aflatoon was having 1/4 th share in the suit properties and hence the plaintiffs are entitled to get 1/4 th share in the suit properties. Right now, unless it is shown that the properties which are subject matter of the Appeal, it will not be possible to assail the finding of the learned District Judge. Ordinarily, an injunction restraining the parties from creating third party interests need not be granted in view of section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act which takes sufficient care of the interest of the plaintiff. But since injunction has been granted in exercise of discretion by the learned District Judge, which is not shown to be errornous or perverse, I would not interfere with the order passed by the learned District Judge. In view of the provisions of section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, the Appellant would not be in a position to sale or dispose of or create third party interest in respect of the suit property without leave of the Court even without an injunction. Therefore, injunction does not put any additional restraint on the appellant other than those which are statutorily imposed. Therefore, the Appeal is disposed of. 4 The learned trial Judge shall expeditiously hear the suit since it is of the year 2003. The question as to whether the suit should be tried by the C.J.J.D. Or C.J.S.D need not detain the trial as the Court in which suit was filed is one of C.J.S.D competent to hear the suit and Joint Civil Judge (J.D.) only works in that court. 5 The suit shall be decided within a period of one year from today. (R.C.CHAVAN,J.)