Shammi Babbar vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others

Ravi Malimath, J

Learned counsel for the petitioner requests that he may delete respondent no.3 from the proceedings.

At his request respondent no.3 is deleted from the proceedings.

The plea of the petitioner is to direct the respondents not to demolish the property without giving any opportunity to him.

Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 submits that the proceedings are already pending in original suit no. 360 of 2020 and appropriate relief can be obtained from the trial court. To this, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be granted a reasonable time to approach the trial court and till then his possession of the property may be protected.

In law, even though, we do not find any ground to grant an interim order, purely on the basis of equity, we deem it just and necessary that the respondents be directed not to demolish the alleged encroachment of the property of the petitioner till the end of November, 2020.

In the interregnum, the petitioner is at liberty to move the concerned civil court for necessary relief. We hereby clarify that we have not opined anything either about the right, title or interest of the petitioner, in any manner, whatsoever. It is for the trial court alone to determine the same.

With the above observations, the petition stands disposed off.