Allahabad High Court

SHAILENDRA KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusSRI DEVLAL AND 6 OTHERS

Decided: 23 September 2026
Bench: ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL

Holding

The appeal is maintainable and the matter is remanded to the trial court to decide the temporary injunction application afresh.

Summary

Petitioners filed a suit and obtained an ad interim injunction, subsequently moving a temporary injunction (7‑C) application. The respondents appealed the ad interim injunction under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) of the CPC. The High Court partially allowed the appeal and remanded the matter to the trial court to reconsider the 7‑C application. Petitioners contended that the appeal was not maintainable because the temporary injunction application was still pending, relying on Gurmej Singh v. Ranjit Kaur. The Court held that the appeal could proceed and ordered the trial court to decide the temporary injunction application within one month while maintaining the status quo over the disputed property, and disposed of the writ petition.

Issues considered

Whether a miscellaneous civil appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) CPC is maintainable against an ad interim injunction when a temporary injunction application is pending.
Whether the High Court under Article 227 can direct the trial court to decide the pending temporary injunction application.

Legislation cited

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. Order XLIII Rule 1(r)
Constitution of India — s. Article 227

Subjects

temporary injunction
ad interim injunction
miscellaneous civil appeal
Order XLIII
Article 227
status quo
remand
High Court

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 13353 of 2026

Shailendra Kumar And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus

Sri Devlal And 6 Others
.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Saurabh Tripathi, Sohit Prakash
Sharma
Counsel for Respondent(s) :

Court No. - 9
HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.

1. In the suit filed by plaintiffs-petitioners, an application for grant of
temporary injunction 7-C was moved in which ad interim injunction was
granted. Defendants have filed a misc. civil appeal under Order XLIII
Rule 1(r) CPC which has been partly allowed and matter has been
remanded to trial court to decide the 7-C application afresh.

2. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that misc. civil appeal filed
under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) CPC was not maintainable as it was filed
against an ad interim injunction and temporary injunction application is
still pending consideration. He has relied upon a decision of co-ordinate
Bench rendered in case of Gurmej Singh and others vs. Ranjit Kaur
and others 2020 (12) ADJ 561.

3. After hearing learned counsel for petitioner and perusing the material
on record, I find that the matter has been remanded back to trial court.
The writ petition is disposed of requiring the trial court to proceed with 7-
C application filed in Original Suit No. 167 of 2025 and decide the same,
within one month, from the date of production of certified copy of this
order.

4. Till the decision of the said application, parties to maintain status quo
over the property in dispute.

(Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.)
September 24, 2026
(V. S. SINGH)

Digitally signed by :-
VIDYA SAGAR SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…