2025:UHC:7853 1 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition Misc. Single No. 2592 of 2025 04 September, 2025 Shri Hukum Chand & another --Petitioners Versus Bina Sahni & another --Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Pankaj Tangwan, learned counsel for the petitioners/plaintiffs. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. By means of the present writ petition, petitioners have sought the following reliefs:- “I- Issue a writ, order or direction for setting aside the impugned order dated 23.07.2025. II- Issue a writ of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent no.1, not interfere/raise any construction or not to create any third party on suit property of original suit no.187 of 2025 pending before court of Civil Judge (J.D.), Vikasnagar, Dehradun. The title of suit is Shri Hukum Chand and another vs. Smt. Bina and another. III- Issue a writ of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent no.2 to declaration that the alleged Sale Deed bearing no.1707 dated 03.06.2002, purporting to have been executed by Plaintiff No.1 in favour of Defendant no.1, is fraudulent, forged, fabricated, null and void ab initio, and liable to be cancelled and expunged from the official records of the Sub-Registrar, Vikasnagar, Dehradun.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners does not want to press the relief claimed in clause (I) of the relief clause. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed insofar as relief no. (I) is concerned. 3. The case of the petitioners is that they were gifted a piece of land by their father through a registered gift deed dated 23.12.2024, comprising Khasra No. 5318?k 2025:UHC:7853 2 of Khata No. 00788 of Village Rasulpur, Tehsil Vikasnagar, District Dehradun, admeasuring 570 sq. meters. Respondent No.1 has started construction over the said plot. The petitioners/plaintiffs have instituted Original Suit No. 187 of 2025, Shri Hukum Chand & Another vs. Bina Sahni & Another, for permanent injunction. Along with the said suit, an application (6C2) under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC has also been filed for temporary injunction. The learned trial court, vide order dated 23.07.2025, issued notice to the respondents/defendants on the said application and called for their objections. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners/plaintiffs submits that objections (43C2) have now been filed by respondent/defendant No. 1, which were taken on record on 14.08.2025, and the matter has been fixed for 24.09.2025. He further submits that the respondents/defendants are raising construction with undue haste over the petitioners' property, and therefore, in order to protect their rights, a temporary injunction is urgently required. 5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners/plaintiffs, the writ petition is finally disposed of with a direction to the learned trial court to dispose of the application (6C2) filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs for temporary injunction as expeditiously as possible, but not later than seven days from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. 6. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 04.09.2025 AK