Rajinder vs Hazari Lal and Others

Laxmi Narain Mittal, J.

CM No. 24879 CII of 2012

Allowed as prayed for. Annexures P/1 to P/5 are taken on record subject to all just exceptions.

CR No. 5819 of 2012

Plaintiff has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning judgment dated 20.1.2011 Annexure P/3 passed by

the trial court and judgment dated 5.11.2011 Annexure P/5 passed by the lower appellate court thereby dismissing application filed by plaintiff

under Order 39 Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure. In the suit filed by the plaintiff-petitioner against respondents defendants, on 25.8.2007,

defendants No. 1 and 4 were present through their counsel and the case was adjourned to 18.9.2007 for issuing notice to remaining defendants

No. 2, 3 and 5 to 7 by Munadi. Till then, both the parties were directed to maintain status quo regarding existing position of the suit property vide

order dated 25.8.2007 Annexure P/2.

The plaintiff alleged in his application that in violation of the aforesaid status quo order, defendants have installed fodder cutting machine and

Bonga (stack of chaff) in the suit property and thereby violated order dated 25.8.2007 Annexure P/2.

Defendants No. 2 to 7 contested the application and controverted the averments made therein. It was pleaded that they have not violated the

status quo order Annexure

Both the courts below have dismissed the application filed by the plaintiff who has, therefore, filed this revision petition to assail judgments of the

courts below.

I have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file.

Counsel for the petitioner contended that Sohan Lal respondent No. 7 while appearing in the witness box admitted that while the status quo

order was continuing, they placed Bonga and Bitora ( stack of dung cakes) over the suit property. It was contended that in view of said admission,

it is proved that the defendants violated status quo order Annexure P/2 and therefore, they are liable to be punished for the same.

I have carefully considered the aforesaid contentions which cannot be accepted. Placing of Bitora was not even pleaded by the petitioner. Even

otherwise, status quo order Annexure P/2 was regarding existing position of the suit property and not regarding its user. Mere placing of Bonga

and Bitora, which is moveable property, it cannot be said that there was any violation of status quo order Annexure P/2 regarding existing position

of the suit property. Even installment of fodder cutting machine would not be violative of status quo order Annexure P/2. On the other Hand,

installation of fodder cutting machine, after passing of order Annexure P/2, has not been proved by the petitioner. There is solitary oral statement of

the petitioner in this regard. The same stands rebutted by evidence of the defendants.

There is concurrent finding by both the courts below against the plaintiff-petitioner. The said finding is not shown to be suffering from any

perversity, illegality or jurisdictional error nor it is based on misreading or misappreciation of evidence on record so as to call for interference by

this Court in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. In addition to the aforesaid, the instant revision

petition is also barred by delay and laches having been filed more than 10 months after the passing of the impugned judgment Annexure P/5 by the

lower appellate court.

Resultantly, I find no merit in this revision petition which is, therefore, dismissed in limine.