THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR C.R.P. No. 4695 of 2007 Order: This CRP is directed against the order dated 03.08.2007 passed in C.M.A. No.20 of 2006 by the Senior Civil Judge, Gajuwaka, whereby and whereunder the order dated 13.03.2006 passed in I.A. No.912 of 2005 in O.S. No.405 of 2005 by the Junior Civil Judge, Gajuwaka, was reversed. The brief facts of the case are as follows. The petitioners herein along with their father, who is no more at present, filed O.S. No.405 of 2005 for permanent injunction against the respondents herein. During the pendency of the suit, they filed I.A. No.912 of 2005 in O.S. No. 405 of 2005 seeking interim injunction. The learned Junior Civil Judge, Gajuwaka, after hearing both the parties, passed orders granting temporary injunction in favour of the petitioners herein and their father. Aggrieved by the same, the second respondent herein filed an appeal in CMA No.20 of 2006 and the learned Senior Civil Judge, Gajuwaka, by the orders dated 03.08.2007, allowed the said CMA. Challenging the same, the present CRP has been filed. The only contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that admittedly the petitioners are the original owners of the property and that initially they had executed a registered GPA in favour of the first respondent herein on 18.05.1987 and subsequently by executing cancellation deed they cancelled the GPA on 12.04.2005 and that after canceling that GPA the first respondent executed a sale deed in favour of the second respondent on 03.06.2005 and made a false claim that the petitioners herein had executed a possessory agreement of sale on 18.05.1987 in his favour. The main question that came up for consideration is whether the cancellation deed canceling the GPA is valid or not. The appellate Court considered Ex.A4 the deed of cancellation of GPA. It appears that there are two cancellation deeds one is Ex.A3 and another is Ex.A4. Ex.A3 is dated 02.04.2005 and stamps in that document are seems to have been purchased on 02.04.2005 and the said document was registered vide document No.17 of 2005 and entered at CS No.16 of 2005 in book No.IV. Another cancellation deed Ex.A4 was also registered on 02.04.2005. However, the stamp vendor seems to have written the date of the sale of stamps as 02.06.2005. Obviously, it appears to be a mistake because when the document was registered on 02.04.2005 the question of purchasing the stamps subsequently on 02.06.2005 would not arise. Any how, the appellate Court considering the discrepancy with regard to date of purchase of stamps and date of registration of the document allowed the appeal. The appellate Court also seems to have observed that no notice was issued to the GPA holder before executing the cancellation deed and therefore the second respondent seems to be a bona fide purchaser. Be that as it may, since the suit has been pending since 2005, without going into the merits of the matter, I consider it just and reasonable to direct the trial Court to dispose of the main suit as early as possible, preferably within a period of six (6) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Meanwhile, both the parties are directed not to alienate the suit schedule properties or create any third party interest over the same. Accordingly, the CRP is disposed of. However, in the circumstances, no costs. ______________________ B. CHANDRA KUMAR, J. Date: 03.02.2011 Nsr