SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
C. Hari Shankar, J.
Satish Chandra - Appellant
Versus
Krishan Kumar - Respondent
CM(M) 1 of 2019 & CM No. 11 of 2019
Decided On : 31-05-2022




The definition of 'status quo' in legal terms encompasses both possession and user of property; alterations to this status trigger violation of court orders under Article 227.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 227 - Contempt of court proceedings - Application filed under Section 151 of CPC for violating status quo orders regarding property use and possession - Court upheld the interpretation of status quo to include user of property, ruling that changing the character of property constitutes a violation. (Paras 9, 20, 24)

(B) Jurisdiction - The High Court under Article 227 does not function as an appellate body but rather to supervise inferior courts' adherence to legal authority and due process. The court emphasized that errors in judgments are not grounds for supervisory correction unless they exhibit jurisdictional faults. (Paras 16, 20, 26)

Facts of the case:
The appellant, as a defendant in a partition suit filed by the respondent, converted a room of a guest house into a shop, allegedly breaching prior orders to maintain status quo regarding property.

Findings of Court:
The learned Additional District Judge ruled the appellant’s actions violated the existing status quo orders concerning property usage, necessitating restoration to the previous state as per court directives.

Issues: The central issue involved whether the use of property could be altered under the guise of maintaining possession and whether prior orders were violated.

Ratio Decidendi: The court affirmed that the definition of status quo encompasses all usages of property, including its character, and any change constitutes a breach of the court's order.

Result: Petition dismissed with no costs awarded.

JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assails order dated 24th December, 2018 passed by the learned Additional District Judge ("the learned ADJ") on an application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) filed by the respondent, as the plaintiff in CS 639/06 (subsequently renumbered as CS 618788/16).

2. Satish Chandra, the petitioner in the present petition, was Defendant 2 in CS 639/06, and the respondent Krishan Kumar was the plaintiff. CS 639/06 was instituted by the respondent against the petitioner and six other defendants seeking partition, rendition of accounts and mandatory injunction in respect of four properties. The suit was accompanied by an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC, seeking interlocutory injunction. The prayer clause in the plaint reads thus:

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that:

    (a) a preliminary decree for partition by determining the share in the immovable properties i.e. the entire portion on western side including the terrace over it and the roof on the back side of the western portion shown in RED colour of property no. 3857, CHARKHEWALAN, DELHI and property no. B-14, SURYA NAGAR, GHAZIABAD, U.P. and movable properties as mentioned in Schedule-B and to determine the share of the plaintiff and other defendants in the said properties, which are liable to be partitioned.

    It is further prayed that a preliminary decree of partition of HUF premises bearing no. 1881, HAVELI JUGAL KISHORE, CHANDNI CHOWK, DELHI-110006 of M/S RAMCHAND LAKHPAT RAI, HUE, wherein the HUF business of Krishna Guest House is being run be passed by meets and bounds in favour of plaintiff and against the defendants no. 1 to 3 thereby determining whatever right, interest and share the said parties have/derived in the said property.

    (b) pass a final decree of partition of the movable and immovable suit properties by meets and bound amongst the co-sharers and to separate the share of the plaintiff therein.

    (c) to pass a decree for perpetual injunction restraining the defendants no. to 3, their agents, servants and employees and representatives from interfering in the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff in his shop on the ground floor of property no. 3857, CHARKHEWALAN, DELHI, shown in BLUE colour and the terrace on the Eastern Portion of the said property shown BLUE colour and also from interfering in the possession and the business of the plaintiff being run in SHOP NO. 1881-A, HAVELI JUGAL KISHORE, CHANDNI CHOWK, DELHI and from selling, disposing off or creating any third party interest in any of the undivided Suit properties movable and immovable, which are jointly owned by the plaintiff and the defendants no. 1 to 3 and from interfering in peaceful possession of the plaintiff in property no. B-14, SURYA NAGAR and 3857, CHARKHEWALAN, DELHI.

    (d) pass a decree for rendition of accounts against the defendant no. 1 directing him to full and detailed accounts of the income of the HUF business of Krishna Guest House being run at 1881, HAVELIJUGAL KISHORE, CHANDNI CHOWK, DELHI.

    (e) the costs of the suit may kindly be decree in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants."

3. On 26th July, 2006, a Coordinate Single Bench of this Court directed the parties in the suit to "maintain status quo in respect of Shop No. 1881, Haveli Jugal Kishore, Chandni Chowk, Delhi." (hereinafter referred to as "1881").

4. IA 4271/2006 and 10111/2007, filed by Respondent 1 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC, came to be disposed of, by the following order, passed by this Court, on 18th February, 2008:

    "All these applications have been taken up for hearing together because the counsel for both the parties have agreed for passing of a consent order on the said applications.

    The plaintiff has filed this suit for partition, rendition of accounts and injunction regarding the following properties:

    1 Property bearing No. 3857,Charkhewalan,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top