C.R. No. 149 of 2011 (O&M) [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 149 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: January 10, 2011 Vinod Kumar Bajaj and others …..Petitioners Vs. Rajinder Kumar Malhotra and another …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr.O.P. Hoshiarpuri, Advocate for the petitioners. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) An application for interim injunction filed by the plaintiff- petitioners has been dismissed by the Courts below. The plaintiff- petitioners have challenged the validity of the sale deed dated April 22, 2008 and the order passed by Registrar permitting the registration of sale deed on the ground of fraud and misrepresentation. C.R. No. 149 of 2011 (O&M) [2] Counsel for the petitioners has vehemently contended that the alienation of the property should have been stayed in order to avoid the multiplicity of the litigation. I have considered the contention of counsel for the petitioners in context to the facts and circumstances of this case. Counsel for the petitioners has made a reference to the order passed by the Assistant Collector, Ist Grade, deferring the mutation proceedings sine die on account of the pendency of the civil suit. In view of said fact the mutation has not been entered in favour of respondent No.1 as such the apprehension of the petitioners that on the basis of the revenue record the property will be alienated, seems to be misconceived. It is observed that in any case, any transfer of the property during the pendency of the litigation will be governed by the principle of lis pendence. No ground is made out for interference in the order passed by the Courts below declining to grant interim injunction. Dismissed. January 10, 2011 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE