Law: Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Section: 1 & 2

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 9

Case Summary The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the concurrent orders of the Civil Judge and Additional District Judge, whereby his application for a temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 CPC was dismissed. The petitioner had instituted a suit for declaration and permanent injunction regarding a 1 Kanal 13 Marla plot situated in Humak, Islamabad. The Court found that the petitioner was merely a tenant of one of the co-sharers, while the suit property was admittedly joint, unpartitioned property. A demarcation report confirmed that no lawful partition had taken place. Applying the settled principle that every co-sharer is deemed to be in possession of every inch of undivided joint property, the Court held that the petitioner failed to establish a prima facie case for the grant of an interim injunction. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed. Tagline No injunction can be granted over unpartitioned joint property; every co-sharer is deemed to possess every inch until lawful partition. ORDER; Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 17.06.2022, passed by the learned Civil Judge 1st Class-East, Islamabad and the judgment dated 05.10.2022, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Islamabad (East), whereby application under order XXXIX, Rule 1 & 2, CPC filed by the petitioner was dismissed concurrently. The facts in brief are that the petitioner/plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against respondents No.3 to 6/defendants in respect of plot measuring 1 Kanal 13 Marla, Khewat No.940, Khasra No.3346, situated in Revenue Estate of Humak, Tehsil & District Islamabad (“Suit Property”). Along with the suit petitioner/plaintiff filed an application under order XXXIX, Rule 1 & 2, CPC. Respondents No.3 to 6/defendants entered appearance and filed their written statement to the suit as well as reply to the application. The learned Civil Judge after hearing the arguments on the application, dismissed the same vide order dated 17.06.2022. The petitioner feeling aggrieved of the said order filed an appeal before the learned Additional…