Civil Rev. 2502 of 2008 1 IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH Civil Rev. 2502 of 2008 Date of decision: 29.7.2009 Chetan Kaur Petitioner vs Zora Singh and another Respondent Present Mr. KPS Gill, Advocate Mr. Vijay Shama, Advocate M.M.S.BEDI,J. The plaintiff- petitioner Chetan Kaur had challenged the validity of a gift deed dated 5.3.2007 executed by her husband Zora Singh in favour of her nephew Swaran Singh defendant No.2. She also prayed for permanent injunction to restrain the defendants or their agents from dispossessing her from the property in dispute and for restraining them from further alienating the property in dispute by sale, mortgage or by any other manner. The application for interim injunction was allowed to the extent that the plaintiff will not be dispossessed illegally and forcibly from the house in dispute. She filed an appeal against the order dated 1.12.2007 claiming that an interim injunction should have also been granted restraining the defendant No.2 from alienating the suit property. The order passed by the trial court was affirmed by the lower appellate court. Feeling aggrieved by the orders passed by the courts below, the plaintiff-petitioner has preferred the instant revision petition. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the Civil Rev. 2502 of 2008 2 petitioner informs that the petitioner has died during the pendency of the revision petition, as such legal heirs should be required for pursuing the revision petition in accordance with law. I have considered the said contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. So far as the protection of possession and interference by defendant- respondents in the possession of the plaintiff- petitioner is concerned, these were the individual rights and the petitioner had a right to protect her possession but so far as the right in the title of the property in dispute is concerned, there is no interim relief granted by the courts below. The alienation of the property, if any, by the respondents would be governed by the principle of lis pendence . It is not apparent that till date any alienation has taken place. It will always be open to the heirs of Chetan Kaur to protect their possession, if any, under the protection, which was granted to the deceased-petitioner during the pendency of her suit but so far as alienation is concerned, the legal heirs will have an independent right to challenge the transfer of the property in accordance with law. In view of the above discussion, it is apparent that the revision petition has become infructuous and is disposed of as such without prejudice to the rights of the legal heirs of the petitioner. July 29 ,2009 ( M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE