1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR APPEAL AGAINST ORDER NO.35/2009 (Smt. Indira Nitin Ghuguskar vs. Ramesh Tukaram Badwaik and others) Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's order Coram : R.C. CHAVAN, J. Dated : 23rd June, 2009 Heard Mr S P Kshirsagar, learned Advocate for the appellant and Mr P S Sadavarte, learned counsel for Respondent No. 1. 2. This is an appeal directed against the order passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nagpur, below Exh.5 in Special Civil Suit No.1228/2007, whereby she rejected the appellant’s application for an injunction to restrain the respondents/ defendants–her brothers, from creating third party interest in the properties described in the Schedule to the plaint, of which the appellant has sought partition and separate possession. 3. Even if the appellant’s contentions are accepted at its face value, she has 1/5 th share in the property which is in the hands of her brothers. She has filed a suit for partition 2 and separate possession of her share. She seeks an injunction to restain the non- applicants from alienating the property or creating third party interest during pendency of the suit. This object of securing her interest in the property can be achieved by her registering the lis in which case, her claim will be secured under section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act. Whenever it is possible to achieve an object with least restraint on the parties, that course should be adopted. Therefore ordinarily, when the avenue of registering lis to secure interests is available, it would be proper for the appellant to persue that avenue. 4. Apprehensions of the learned counsel for the appellant, that observations in the impugned order that the propoerty is self acquired would amount to pre-judging the issue, have to be set at rest. These observations are made on the basis of material which was available at the time of deciding the application and would obviously not bind the learned Judge when she decides the suit on merits, after cosnidering ther entire evidence tendered. Needless to mention that the impugned order would obviously not come in the way of the appellant in registering her lis since what the appellant could be registering is the lis and not adjudication. 3 5. In view of this since the impugned order passed by the learned Civil Judge, Sr.Dn, in exercise of her discretion, does not call for any interference as the appellant’s interest could be otherwise protected by her registering the lis, appeal is dismissed. JUDGE sahare