Police assistance for the implementation of an interim order can only be allowed for the party in whose favor the order was passed.

JUDGMENT :

(Ajay Mohan Goel, J.)

By way of this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged order dated 01.12.2023, in terms whereof, the learned Civil Judge, Court No.3, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P., has allowed an application filed by the respondents herein for grant of police assistance for the implementation of an ad-interim order dated 28.09.2023.

2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present petition are that that the petitioners herein have filed a Civil Suit against the respondents. The suit is for Permanent Prohibitory Injunction. Alongwith the suit, the petitioners have also preferred an application under order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Learned Trial Court, vide order dated 28.09.2023, copy whereof is appended with the petition as Annexure P-5, ordered the parties to maintain status quo qua possession till the next date of hearing, in interest of preservation of the property. Subsequently, an application was filed by the respondents herein, i.e., the defendants before the learned Trial Court under Section 151 of the CPC for providing police assistance for the implementation of the interim order dated 28.09.2023. This application has been allowed by the learned Trial Court vide order dated 01.12.2023 and feeling aggrieved, the petitioners have filed this petition.

3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having carefully perused the order under challenge, this Court is of the considered view that the said order is not sustainable in the eyes of law.

4. It are the petitioners, who have approached the learned Trial Court by way of Civil Suit. It is on their application, filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the CPC, that a status quo order has been passed by the learned Court below on 28.09.2023. If on the strength of the said order, the petitioners herein, were creating any undue interference, then nothing prevented the respondents herein from filing an appropriate application may be under the provisions of 39 Rule 4 of the CPC, seeking appropriate direction from the Trial Court including the vacation/modification/clarification of the said order. However, rather than doing so, they filed an application seeking police assistance against the petitioners for implementation of an order, which in fact the petitioners had obtained against the respondents.

5. Learned Trial Court while allowing the application erred in appreciating this extremely important aspect of the matter. It erred in not appreciating that police assistance could not have been allowed by it in favour of the defendants, i.e., the non-applicants in the application filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the CPC because application seeking police assistance could have been entertained by the Trial Court for implementation of its order, had the same been filed by the party in whose favour the order was passed. Therefore, as there is perversity writ large on the face of the order, which stands impugned by way of this petition, the petition is allowed and order dated 01.12.2023, passed by learned Civil Judge, Court No.3 Mandi, District Mandi, H.P., is quashed and set aside.

6. It is made clear that this order shall not come in the way of the respondents herein for filing an appropriate application, if so advised, for vacation/modification of the interim order.

7. The petition stands disposed of, so also pending miscellaneous applications, if any.