UKHC010123062026 2026:UHC:6135 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/2145/2026 Mohd Yasin & Others --Petitioners Versus Naseem Ahmed --Respondent Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Chandel, Advocate, for the petitioners. (2) Petitioners have challenged the order of temporary injunction, passed by Trial Court in favour of respondent. They have also challenged the judgment rendered by Additional District Judge, whereby their appeal under Order 43 Rule 1 CPC was dismissed. (3) Perusal of the order passed by the Trial Court reveals that Trial Court has considered all relevant aspects, including prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss and injury and returned a finding that plaintiff has been able to make out a valid case for grant of temporary injunction. Appellate Court has also considered the matter in detail and has affirmed the order passed by the Trial Court. (4) Since grant of temporary injunction is discretionary and both the courts below have exercised the discretion based on material on record and gave valid reasons, therefore, this Court do not find any reason to interfere in the matter. (5) Learned Counsel for the petitioners refers to para 10 of the replica UKHC010123062026 2026:UHC:6135 for contending that no sale deed was executed in favour of Salma Khatoon, who is predecessor-in-interest of plaintiff- respondent. Para 10 of the replica, however, indicates that sale deed in respect of a plot ad measuring 72 x 33 ft was executed in favour of Salma Khatoon, which was duly registered. Now, whether the disputed property falls within the other plot, regarding which sale deed is yet to be executed, or not cannot be decided while considering plaintiff’s prayer for temporary injunction. Since the plaintiff was able to make out a prima facie case for grant of interim relief, therefore, there is no reason for interfering with the order passed by the Trial Court, as affirmed by the Appellate Court. Writ petition thus fails and is dismissed. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 21.7.2026 Pr PRABODH KUMAR Digitally signed by PRABODH KUMAR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e61af 3aeab198d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB5880 52DF6FCA58C67F3C91957BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR Date: 2026.07.21 19:02:14 +05'30' UKHC010123062026 2026:UHC:6135