C.R. No.3689 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.3689 of 2010 Date of Decision: 15.09.2010 Balour Singh .……Petitioner Versus Shinder Kaur and others ……Respondents Coram:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL. Present: Mr.Vikram Batra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Akshay Jain, Advocate for the respondents L. N. MITTAL, J (ORAL) Plaintiff-Balour Singh has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning judgment dated 19.05.2010 passed by learned Additional District Judge (Ad hoc) Fast Track Court, Mansa thereby allowing the appeal preferred by defendants/respondents and dismissing the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction. Trial Court vide order dated 28.10.2009 Annexure P-1 had allowed plaintiff's application for temporary injunction and thereby restrained the defendants from alienating the suit property and from interfering in possession of the plaintiff over the suit property without due process of law till final disposal of the suit. However, learned appellate Court vide impugned judgment dated 19.05.2010 allowed the appeal preferred by defendants and dismissed the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction. Notice in the instant revision petition has been issued C.R. No.3689 of 2010 -2- only qua temporary injunction to restrain the respondents from alienating the suit property during pendency of the suit and not for temporary injunction qua possession. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered opinion that ends of justice would be met if the defendants are directed to recite in the deed of alienation about pendency of the suit, if and when any alienation of the suit property is made by the defendants. By doing so, interest of the plaintiff- petitioner would be protected because the prospective alienee would not be able to take plea of being bona fide purchaser without being aware of the pendency of the suit. At the same time, defendants would also not suffer any loss or injury by any such direction. For the reasons aforesaid, the instant revision petition is disposed of by directing the defendants/respondents that if they alienate the suit property during the pendency of the suit, they shall inform the alienee by specific recital in deed of alienation about the pendency of the suit and shall also, within one month of the execution of deed of alienation, inform the trial Court about the alienation and place on record copy of the alienation deed. Nothing in this order shall affect the merits of the suit. ( L. N. MITTAL ) JUDGE 15.09.2010. A. Kaundal