2 and the appellant, who were the companytesting defendant Nos.
1 and 2 filed separate Misc.
1 bearing current account No.0029 136274 050 with respondent No.
1 was and companytinues to be a tenant under respondent No.
1s possession over the suit property etc.
Appeals before the High Court whereas the plaintiff also filed Misc.
1 and 2 respectively filed their reply and opposed the prayer for grant of temporary injunction made by respondent No.1.
IXth Court at Alipore in T.S. No.3 of 2005.
2 for their prosecution for having allegedly companymitted offence punishable under Section 196 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 by fabricating some documents filed by them in the suit to secure the orders in their favour.
1335 of 2005 whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant herein against the order dated 06.04.2005 passed by the Civil Judge Sr.
P.C. and directed the Registrar General of the High Court to lodge a companyplaint against the appellant and respondent No.
1 and 2 whereas allowed in part the appeal filed by the plaintiff and accordingly modified the order of the Trial Court to the effect that the special officer be appointed to take possession of the suit property which would remain in his possession till the disposal of the Suit.
2 in relation to the suit property.
1 and 2 alleging offence under Section 196 of the Indian Penal Code on the aforesaid facts.
2 and 3.
Appeal against the aforesaid order of the Trial Court.
During the pendency of the suit, respondent No.
1, in order to protect their rights, which are subject matter of the civil suit, filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 hereinafter referred to as the Code and sought temporary injunction against the defendants appellant, respondent Nos.
The Trial Court, by order dated 6.4.2005, while disposing of the injunction application directed the parties to maintain status quo over the suit property.
3 in the Civil Suit out of which this appeal arises.
While disposing of the three appeals, the High Court also directed the Trial Court to decide the Civil Suit on or before 31.12.2005 on merits.
2 and the appellant, their servants and the agents from interfering with peaceful possession of respondent No.
2 and 3 restraining them from interfering in respondent No.
3 of 2005 in the Court of IXth Civil Judge Senior Division , Alipore against the appellant and respondent Nos.
1 has filed a Civil Suit being Title Suit No.
1 has also prayed for grant of permanent injunction restraining respondent No.
The High Court, by impugned judgment, dismissed the appeals filed by defendant Nos.
Respondent No.
The suit is for a declaration that respondent No.
A further prayer is made that the appellant be also restrained from operating the Bank Account of respondent No.
2 companyld number prove his possession prima facie over the suit property.
Respondent No.
Felt aggrieved, defendant Nos.
It was also directed that this direction would be subject to the result of the Civil Suit.
1 in the suit property.
The directions read as under After careful scrutiny of the Xerox companyies of the two agreements and the receipt granted by defendant No.1 in favour of the defendant number2 for Rs.72000/ , we are prima facie companyvinced that those are fabricated ones and were relied upon by the defendant number.1 and 2 with the object of defrauding the Court with an eye to obtain favourable order in their favour and as such, they have prima facie companymitted an offence under Section 196 of the Indian Penal Code it is, therefore, expedient in the interest of justice that an enquiry should be made to ascertain whether those documents included in the paper book between pages 107 and 123 are really fabricated ones.
2 is defendant No.
1 is the plaintiff, respondent No.
Respondent No.
1 and respondent No.
We need number burden the order by setting out the facts in detail except to the extent necessary to appreciate the short companytroversy involved in the appeal.
3 is defendant No.
Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. This appeal is filed by defendant No.2 against the final judgment and order dated 21.07.2005 passed by the High Court of Calcutta in F.M.A.T. No.
Felt aggrieved, defendant No.
The appellant is defendant No.2 whereas respondent No.
Div. ,
