1) ypou have to opt for feature review of legal documents 

2) make payment online and the fees for lawyers are mentioned on website 

3) you can make application restraining builder from creating third party rights on flats constructed on your share of property 

4) if your earlier application was rejected it is necessary to peruse reasons mentioned in said order  to advice 

5)court can pass orders to demolish construction carried on other co sharer land 

6) In view of the law laid down by in the case of Ram Niwas v. Jai Ram and Tej Ram 2000(3) C.C.C. 379 (supra)  a co-sharer cannot be allowed to change the nature of the joint property by raising construction, detrimental to the interest of the other co-sharers.

A co-sharer is not permitted to construct /errect any permanent structure on other's share. He is also not permitted to do the same on his own share except for maintenance purposes until the shares are determined through a mutual settlement or partition suit.

Court can order for demolition of such kind of construction.

Under article 227 HC is empowered to call for records of proceding of any lower court and issue any direction as per merit of the case.

Once your injunction application is rejected you can make appeal to the applleate authority.

Dear Client,

HC has superintendence jurisdiction of correcting errors u/a 227of disputes between private parties when the Court or Tribunal acts illegally in the exercise of its undoubted jurisdiction, as when it decides without giving an opportunity to the parties to be heard, or violates the principles of natural justice;
Court exercise supervisory and not appellate jurisdiction. NO review of findings of fact reached by the TC.

3. Yes.

Change of circumstances has no effect in civil suits.

Hire consultancy/talk to lawyer.

if there are changes in circumstances fresh application for injunction can be filed stating changes made by respondent 

Change in circumstances no ground to file subsequent stay application. When court not stayed construction that means respondent can construct on disputed area.

Have you filed stay application under Order 39(1) and (2) both ?

You can file a writ petition in HC to challenge the order. You can consult me personally through Kanoon through telephonic Consultation

1. the appellate court must be a party respondent. Check that. A private person can file a WP against the order of lower courts. A private person cannot however file a WP against another private person

2. you may have filed a partition suit claiming your share in the land, but the defendant would be denying the same on the ground that you have no share in the land. Also even if such a partition suit is filed and no stay has been obtained by plaintiff, then nothing stops the defendant from proceeding with construction 

3. even if no third party rights have been created, that does not mean that the building will be ordered to be demolished. Only upon the adjudication of rival claims in the partition suit, would the court take the call whether to order demolition or not, provided such a prayer has been made by the plaintiff in his suit. 

4. a second application for same cause of action and grievance cannot be filed now. However as you have failed to obtain an injunction against the construction, you can file an application that the builder should not create third party interest in the flats being constructed by him

5. call up kanoon contact number and they will guide you how to attach

6. you can book a paid phone consultation or take contact details of the lawyer of your choice from kanoon and then set up an appointment with that lawyer against consultation fee

7. for paid phone consultation the charges are fixed by kanoon itself. Whereas for private consultation you will have to pay the usual consultation fee of the lawyer, which would obviously differ from lawyer to lawyer

1.   The Supreme Court in Surya Devi Rai v. Ram Chander Rai & Ors held that :

Article 227 of the Constitution confers on every High Court the power of superintendence over all courts and tribunals throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction excepting any court or tribunal constituted by or under any law relating to the armed forces.  It is well-settled that the power of superintendence so conferred on the High Court is administrative as well as judicial, and is capable of being invoked at the instance of any person aggrieved or may even be exercised suo motu. The paramount consideration behind vesting such wide power of superintendence in the High Court is paving the path of justice and removing any obstacles therein. The power under Article 227 is wider than the one conferred on the High Court by Article 226 in the sense that the power of superintendence is not subject to those technicalities of procedure or traditional fetters which are to be found in certiorari jurisdiction. Else the parameters invoking the exercise of power are almost similar.

2. Even in the partition suit, though it may be considered as lis pendense, if there is no order of restriction against the defendant, he may proceed with the construction,. the aggrieved party may file an IA under O XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 seeing direction to defendant to restrain from proceeding with the construction and an injunction on ther same lines till the disposal of the main suit.

3.  Until it is not decided that whose share it is, the court may pass an order of injunction against any construction work that is being carried out, provided the petitioner is proving ther violation with documentary evidence.

4.  Yes, you can once again approach the trial court for the same reason due to changes in the circumstances.

5. You can click on the icon of the lawyer to consult him by following the procedures that will be guided by the website.

Yes, you can file an IA seeking temporary injunction on the same grounds due to changes in the circumstances till the disposal of the main suit