HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 2049 of 2025 Court No. - 38 HON'BLE SANDEEP JAIN, J. 1. The instant appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(r) of CPC has been preferred by the plaintiffs against the impugned order dated 14.07.2025 passed by the court of Additional Civil Judge (S.D.), Court No. IV, Kanpur Nagar in O.S. No. 1442/ 2019 (Smt. Rubina and others v. Mohamma Asif and others) whereby plaintiffs' 6-C application for ad interim injunction under Order 39 Rules 1& 2 CPC has been rejected on merits on the ground that neither the plaintiffs are having any title in the disputed property nor they are in possession. 2. Learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellants submitted that an oral gift was executed by the father-in-law of the plaintiffs in favour of the plaintiffs on 05.08.2011, as such, on the basis of this gift, the plaintiffs are the owners and in possession of the disputed property, as such, the trial court erred in rejecting the plaintiffs' 6-C application. 3. I have learned learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellants and perused the impugned order and the documents annexed with the appeal. 4. The impugned order specifically records that on 05.08.2011, the father- in-law of the plaintiffs had made an oral gift in favour of the plaintiffs but subsequently, on 18.11.2017 had executed a registered gift-deed in favour of defendant no. 1 Mohammad Asif and on the basis of this registered gift-deed, the trial court concluded that neither the plaintiffs are the owners nor in possession of the disputed property and accordingly, the plaintiffs' 6-C application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC has been Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Suresh Kumar Gupta Counsel for Respondent(s) : Rubana Begum And Another .....Appellant(s) Mohammad Asif And Another .....Respondent(s) rejected. Aggrieved against which, the instant appeal has been filed by the plaintiffs. 5. It is apparent that the plaintiff-appellants have filed the instant suit for cancellation of the subsequent registered gift-deed dated 18.11.2017 executed by the father-in-law of the plaintiffs in favour of the defendant no. 1 and since the plaintiffs failed to produce any document so as to substantiate, that they were having any legal interest in the disputed property, as well as, were in it's possession, as such, prima facie, the trial court has not erred in passing the impugned order. It is only after parties had led the relevant evidence, it is to be decided whether the subsequent gift-deed dated 18.11.2017 was valid or not and at this stage, the validity and genuinity of the above gift deed can not be adjudicated by this Court. 6. In view of the above, this appeal is meritless and is liable to be dismissed at the admission stage. 7. The appeal is hereby dismissed at the admission stage. The impugned order of the trial court dated 14.07.2025 is affirmed. 8. The concerned trial court is hereby directed to decide the suit on merits, expeditiously preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to the parties, in accordance with law. October 13, 2025 Rama Kant FAFO No. 2049 of 2025 2 (Sandeep Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAMA KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad