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

2003 Supreme(P&H) 664

VINEY MITTAL
Surjit Kaur – Appellant
Versus
Pritam Singh – Respondent


Judgment

Viney Mittal, J.

1. The present revision petition is directed against the order dated October 22, 2002 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur, whereby the appeal filed by the plaintiff-respondents against the order dated April 28.2000 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Hoshiarpur was al-lowed and the present petitioner Lakhbir Singh was ordered to be detained in civil prison for a period of three months with a further direction that the trial court would attach his property for awarding appropriate compensation to the applicants for violation of the injunction orders.

2. A suit for mandatory injunction was filed by the original plaintiff Saroop Singh (since dead) for directing defendants-Lakhbir Singh and Iqbal Singh to remove the construction of malba in specific portion of the land in dispute. Along with the aforesaid suit an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the "Code") was filed. Vide order dated December 17, 1994, the learned trial Court directed the parties to maintain status-quo with regard to the actual position obtaining at the spot regarding the nature of the s















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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top