Haria alias Hari Chand vs Radhasoami Satsang Beas

Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J.—Challenge herein is to the order dated 4.2.2014, passed by learned District Judge, Hamirpur, in Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 14 of 2013, whereby while maintaining the order dated 31.7.2013, passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Hamirpur in an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, registered as CMA (Civil Suit No. 94 of 2013) No. 183 of 2013, the appeal has been dismissed.

Bone of contention in the present lis is a piece of land measuring 2 Kanals 6 Marlas, bearing Khasra No. 1294/547/2, situated in Tika Chabutra Khas, Mouza Chabutra, Tehsil Sujanpur, District Hamirpur. The land in dispute previously was in the ownership and possession of the petitioner-plaintiff. He, however, gifted away the same to the 1st respondent-defendant Radha Soami Satsang Beas vide gift deed dated 22.6.2007. The gift deed though is not on record, however, a perusal of the copy thereof produced by learned counsel for the respondents-defendants reveals that the land was gifted away in favour of respondent-defendant No. 1 for Satsang purposes with all rights to utilize the same in any manner whatsoever and even to dispose it of. The possession thereof was also handed over to respondent-defendant No. 1. It seems that the said piece of land being not sufficient for construction of Satsang Bhawan and carrying out other Satsang activities, on providing of bigger chunk of land by one Lal Singh subsequently in March, 2011 nearby the suit land, the 1st respondent-defendant decided to dispose of the suit land and sold the same to respondent-defendant No. 5 in April, 2013 by a registered sale deed for consideration. The said respondent-defendant is now in possession thereof.

The petitioner-plaintiff aggrieved by the alienation of the suit land has filed suit for declaration on the grounds that since the land in dispute was gifted away for conducting Satsang activities and as the same has now been sold by respondent-defendant No. 1, therefore, not only the gift deed, but further sale thereof in favour of respondent-defendant No. 5 be declared null and void. Alongwith the civil suit, he has also filed an application under Order 39 rules 1 and 2 CPC for grant of ad-interim injunction. Learned trial Court has, however, declined the interim relief so sought and dismissed the application. Learned lower Appellate Court has affirmed the order passed by the trial Court vide judgment impugned before this Court in the present petition.

I have gone through the record available at this stage and taken into consideration the submissions made on both sides.

True it is that in a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the scope of interference with the order passed by both the Courts below on appreciation of pleadings and the other material available on record is limited and the same can be interfered with only in exceptional case of jurisdictional error. No case on the ground of jurisdictional error is found to have been made out from the record. The orders passed by both the Courts below on appreciation of the pleadings of the parties and the material available on record call for no interference. The 5th respondent-defendant prima-facie is in possession of the land in dispute on its sale by the 1st respondent-defendant, in his favour. He is present in person. Learned counsel, on instructions, submits that respondent-defendant No. 5 has no intention to alienate, encumber or dispose of the property in dispute in any manner whatsoever. Neither there exists prima-facie case nor balance of convenience lies in favour of the petitioner-plaintiff. The present is also not a case of irreparable loss or injury likely to be caused to him in case the ad-interim injunction is not granted. The mischief likely to be caused by the grant of the temporary injunction would be greater to the respondent-defendant as compared to the petitioner-plaintiff. The impugned order, therefore, calls for no interference, more particularly when respondent-defendant No. 5 has no intention to dispose of, alienate or encumber the suit land in any manner whatsoever.

It being so, I find no substance in this petition and the same, with the above observations, is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.