SBCMA No.1628/2008 Mahaveer Prasad & Ors. Vs. Shri Aadi Gaur Vipra Samaj -[ 1 ]- SBCMA No.1628/2008 Mahaveer Prasad & Ors. Vs. Shri Aadi Gaur Vipra Samaj DATE OF ORDER : - 1.12.2008 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.OP Joshi,for the appellants. <><><> Heard learned counsel for the appellants. The appellants are aggrieved against the order dated 3.11.2008 by which the appellants' application for grant of temporary injunction was rejected and the application of the defendant filed alongwith counter claim was allowed. However, the trial court directed both the parties to maintain the status quo and restrained from alienating the property in dispute. According to learned counsel for the appellants, the appellants are in possession of the part of the property and they are having title by virtue of the Will dated 21st August, 1950. The appellants placed on record the documentary evidence to show that they are owner and in possession of the property. The defendant set up a gift deed dated 28th Nov., 2005, but that is of no use as well as the appellants' SBCMA No.1628/2008 Mahaveer Prasad & Ors. Vs. Shri Aadi Gaur Vipra Samaj -[ 2 ]- title is concerned, it is also submitted that the predecessor of the alleged donor himself transfered title in favour of the appellant by Will. It is also submitted that the trial court has not decided the issue of prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable injury in detail though framed issue. It is also submitted that in the counter claim the defendants themselves admitted possession of the appellant over the part of the property though under different capacity. I considered the submission of learned counsel for the appellants and perused the facts mentioned in the counter claim. The apprehension of appellant that there is observation of the trial court in the impugned order may be observation on merit is concerned, it has no legal foundation because of the reason that any observation made in the impugned order with respect the question of fact is only a prima facie finding of the court below which is required to be recorded while deciding the injunction application and it has nothing to do with the merit of the suit. Therefore, appellants' rights in proving their title of SBCMA No.1628/2008 Mahaveer Prasad & Ors. Vs. Shri Aadi Gaur Vipra Samaj -[ 3 ]- the property or the Will remain unaffected. So far as possession is concerned , for that if the defendants have admitted possession of the appellant over the property in dispute that fact has not been rejected by the trial court in impugned order and, therefore, directing both the parties to maintain the status quo with respect to the property in dispute and not to alienate it in the facts and circumstances of the case is just and reasonable order, which could have been passed. Once the order can be justified with the help of other grounds, it need not to be set aside merely because of the fact that it is not elaborate and detailed order. In view of the above, I do not find any reason to interfere in the impugned order. However, it is made again clear that any observation made in the impugned order will not come in the way of any of the parties on merit of their cases. Hence the appeal of the appellants is disposed of. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. c.p.goyal/-