Suppression of revenue proceedings setting aside relied-upon mutation constitutes unclean hands, disentitling temporary injunction; High Court under Article 227 will not re-appreciate evidence or interfere absent grave injustice or perversity.

Romesh Verma, J.

The present petition arises out of judgment dated 07.05.2025, as passed by learned District Judge, Hamirpur, whereby the appeal as preferred by the defendants/respondents filed under Order 43 Rule 1(r) read with Section 151 of CPC was allowed and the order as passed by learned Civil Judge, Court No.3, Hamirpur, dated 3rd February, 2025, was set aside.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff/ petitioner filed a suit in the Court of learned Civil Judge, Court No.3, Hamirpur, on 14th August, 2024, for issuance of permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants/respondents, their agents, servants, assignees and family members from demolishing the old ancestral house consisting of two rooms, kitchen and courtyard, double storeyed thatched with tin sheets and further raising any sort of new construction thereupon which is situated in the land comprising Khata No.232, Khatoni No.325, Khasra No.779, measuring an area 121-75 Sq.mts. Hadbast No.47 situated in Up Mohal Partap Nagar Mouza Bajuri Tehsil and District Hamirpur, H.P. as per jamabandi for the year 2007-2008 forcibly without approval of site plan. It was averred in the plaint that the suit land measuring 121-75 Sq. Mts. along with old ancestral house, consisting of two rooms, kitchen and courtyard double storeyed thatched with tin sheets is joint between plaintiff and other legal heirs of deceased Smt.Kesri Devi.

3. The defendants/respondents are head strong persons and have no respect for law, who with the object of grabbing the suit land more than their share without getting the suit land partitioned, have started giving unauthorized threats of demolishing the old ancestral house consisting of two rooms, kitchen and courtyard double storeyed thatched with tin sheets in the suit land and raising the new construction thereupon without approval of site plan and without the consent of the plaintiff and oher co-sharers. It was specifically averred in the plaint that the suit land along with two rooms, kitchen and courtyard double storeyed thatched within tin sheets is joint between the plaintiff/petitioner and other legal heirs of deceased Smt.Kesri Devi, which is evident from the mutation No.779 made with red ink in the remarks column of jamabandi for the year 2007-2008.

4. Therefore, in this background, the plaintiff/petitioner sought decree of permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants from restraining them from demolishing the old ancestral house and further raising any sort of new construction thereupon forcibly without approval of site plan and in violation of municipal bye laws. It was further prayed that in case, the defendants/respondents succeed in demolishing the old ancestral house, in that event, the original position of the suit land may be restored by removal of illegal construction by demolition and by passing a decree of mandatory injunction against the defendants.

5. The suit was contested by the defendants/respondents on various grounds such as maintainability, estoppel, locus standi, cause of action and for non-joinder and mis-joinder of necessary parties, concealment of material facts etc. On merits, it was averred in the written statement that the plaintiff is estopped from filing the suit by his own act, deeds and conduct. It was averred that the plaintiff has failed to disclose the factum of execution of Will and