Civil Revision No. 1863 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 1863 of 2011 Date of Decision: 07.07.2011 *** Sabina & Ors. .. Petitioners Vs. Seeta Mahi & Ors. .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present:- Mr. Balram Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. Both the Courts below have granted the relief of ad-interim injunction in favour of the plaintiffs-respondents and have restrained the petitioner-defendants not to alienate, mortgage, exchange or leased out any specific portion of the suit property and further from changing its nature or raising construction thereupon during pendency of the civil suit. Heard. It emerges out from the records that the sale-deeds of the suit property, as produced by the plaintiffs, show them along with Nirmal Singh as co-owners. Though the defendants claimed that the entire consideration thereof was paid by their predecessor Nirmal Singh, but the same is a matter of evidence. Even otherwise, the petitioners-defendants also did not seriously disputed the possession of the plaintiffs-respondents. Finding that the parties are co-sharers and alienation made by any party of the specific number can be resulted into multiplicity of litigation, the Courts below rightly granted ad-interim injunction in favour of the plaintiffs. There is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order. The revision petition, being without merit, is accordingly dismissed in limine. However, the learned trial Court is directed to dispose of the pending suit preferably within nine months. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE July 07, 2011 Jiten