Point of Law : If circumstances of a case are such that assistance of police for enforcement of an order is necessary, an order to this effect can be passed.

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Sharma, J.

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dated 13.7.2021 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Baijnath, Kangra, Himachal Pradesh in CMA No. 175/2021 in Case No. 13/2021, whereby an application under S.151 CPC having been filed by the petitioner/plaintiff (hereinafter, ‘plaintiff’) seeking therein police assistance for implementation of order dated 3.6.2021, came to be rejected, plaintiff has approached this court in the instant proceedings filed under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, praying therein to set aside order dated 13.7.2021 and direct learned court below to provide police assistance to implement the status quo order, so that nature of suit property is not changed in any manner during the pendency of the suit.

2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused material available on record vis-à-vis reasoning assigned in the order impugned in the instant proceedings, this court finds merit in the submission of learned counsel for the plaintiff, that learned court below, while passing impugned order has gone astray. While considering application filed by the plaintiff under S.151 CPC for providing police assistance to implement status quo order, learned court below was only required to see whether status quo order dated 3.6.2021 is being complied by both the parties or not? Learned court below definitely could not go into question of existence of path, if any, leading to the house of plaintiff, while rejecting prayer of the plaintiff for providing police assistance. Though learned court below took cognizance of report of Pradhan, Gram Panchayat to the effect that stones were stacked in front of main door of the plaintiff, but yet proceeded to reject the application on the ground that there is no sufficient material to suggest that path on Khasra No. 1548 leads to the house of the plaintiff.

3. Interestingly, learned court below also took cognizance of the fact that gate and some steps are being constructed towards Khasra No. 1548 but yet dismissed the application on the ground that there is Gair Mumkin Rasta, which touches Khasra No. 1554. Firstly, it is not understood that from where factum of existence of Gair Mumkin Raasta came to the notice of learned court below. Otherwise also, once learned court below, having taken note of averments made in application under Order 39 rules 1 and 2 CPC having been filed by plaintiff, had directed parties to maintain status quo qua nature and possession of suit property till disposal of the suit, there was no occasion for it to make observation if any, with regard to existence of Gair Mumkin Raasta, which allegedly touches land comprised in Khasra No. 1554.

4. Since learned court below had directed the parties to maintain status quo, while considering the application under 151 CPC for police assistance, it was only required to see, “whether the status quo order passed by it is being flouted or not?” Once, it had come to the notice of learned court below through report of Gram Panchayat Pradhan, that stones are stacked in front main door of applicant, there was no occasion for learned court below to reject the application filed by the plaintiff for police assistance. Till the time, status quo order is vacated/modified, the same is required to be complied with, in letter and spirit but since it was not being abided by the respondents, learned court below had no option but to order providing of police assistance to implement the status quo order, so that majesty of law is upheld.

5. Mr. M.A. Khan, learned senior counsel for the respondents duly assisted by Ms. Hem Kanta Kaushal, Advocate, states that as per instructions imparted to him by his clients, no obstruction has been caused in front of main gate leading to the house of the plaintiff, and in any case, obstruction, if any, stands removed as on today.

6. Since no obstruction has been caused by the respondents, there cannot be any occasion for defendants to oppose prayer made by