1 2025:CGHC:54023 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MA No. 215 of 2025 Inderpal Singh Bhatia S/o Shri Harbansh Singh Bhatia Aged About 62 Years R/o Jagatpur, Raigarh, Tehsil And District - Raigarh (C.G.). ... Appellant/Plaintiff. versus 1 - Uma Devi S/o Shri Anil Kumar Dev Aged About 56 Years R/o Ward No. - 6, Boirdadar, Main Road Raigarh, Tehsil And District - Raigarh (C.G.). 2 - Shubham Agrawal S/o Satish Kumar Agrawal Aged About 24 Years R/o Plot No. - 243, Ward No. -36, Kalindi Kunj Colony, Mitthumuda, Raigarh, Tahasil And District - Raigarh (C.G.). 3 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, Raigarh (C.G.). ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Shri Akhil Kumar Samantray appears through VC. along with Ms. Pooja Yadav, Advocates. For State/Res. : Shri Rajeev Bharat, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Judgment on Board 06/11/2025 1. This Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred against the order dated 13.08.2025 passed by the First District Judge, Raigarh C.G. in Civil Suit AVINASH SHARMA Digitally signed by AVINASH SHARMA Date: 2025.11.06 16:10:41 +0530 2 No.1-A/2025, whereby application, preferred by the appellant/plaintiff under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC seeking injunction that no third party interest shall be created during the pendency of the suit, was dismissed. 2. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the documents filed along with the Appeal. 3. Admittedly, there is a statutory bar in terms of Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (for short “the TP Act, 1882”). 4. For the sake of brevity, Section 52 of the TP Act, 1882, is reproduced hereunder: “52. Transfer of property pending suit relating thereto.- During the pendency in any Court having authority within the limits of India excluding the State of Jammu and Kashmir or established beyond such limits by the Central Government [ ***] of any suit or proceeding which is not collusive and in which any right to immoveable property is directly and specifically in question, the property cannot be transferred or otherwise dealt with by any party to the suit or proceeding so as to affect the rights of any other party thereto under any decree or order which may be made therein, except under the authority of the Court and on such terms as it may impose.” 5. From reading of the aforesaid statutory provision, it is explicit that during the pendency of the lis, no party has a right to alienate the subject 3 property. This is intended to avoid multiplicity of the suits and to protect the rights of other party, therefore, it is directed that the parties shall abide by the terms of the aforesaid statutory provision. 6. With the aforesaid observation and modification in the impugned order, the present Appeal stands disposed of. 7. The concerned Court is also directed to expedite the Civil Suit No.1-A/2025. Sd/- (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Avinash