Ajit Kumar, J.
1. Heard Sri Ravi Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners.
2. Petitioner is defendant in Suit being O.S. No. 165 of 2018 instituted by plaintiff/ opposite party seeking a decree for permanent prohibitory injunction. During the pendency of suit, misc. application was filed bearing paper no. 6C-2 which came to be disposed of by the order of trial court dated 07.01.2022 directing the parties to maintain status quo. Instead of present petitioner, defendant in the suit has himself approached the forum of appeal seeking the order passed by the trial court to be set aside and further injunction restraining the defendant/ respondent from interfering in the possession of plaintiff/ respondent in respect of the suit property. However, after appreciating the facts available before the court, objection filed by the defendant, the Additional District Judge allowed the miscellaneous appeal vide order dated 29.08.2022 setting aside the order passed by the trial court upon 6C application. Thus, the matter of temporary injunction has come to be closed. Petitioner, who is defendant in the suit has approached this Court with contention that there was some agreement between the plaintiff and the present petitioner to execute a conveyance of sale in respect of the suit property and for that purpose he had passed on certain amount as consideration. However, learned counsel for the petitioner has very fairly concedes that there has been no registered agreement for sale.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has passed on a valid consideration and even if he was having an unregistered agreement for sale, he still possesses right to defend possession against the plaintiff and for that purpose the unregistered agreement for sale can always be taken into account.
4. In the considered view of the Court, once the temporary injunction application has come to be rejected by the court of appeal and temporary injunction order granted in the nature of status quo has been set aside, the defendant/ petitioner cannot have any grievance because it was not his application for injunction. It is always open for the plaintiff/ petitioner to approach this Court against the order passed in Misc.Appeal by which the order of temporary injunction has been set aside. If the petitioner has any grievance in the matter of possession of the property in question, he can always file a counter claim in the suit and also seek temporary injunction, if so advised.
5. Subject to the aforesaid liberty, this petition is dismissed. Consigned to records.
