The court emphasized the inherent power of the court to prevent disobedience by granting police help for implementation of the order of status quo and to put parties back in the position as they stood prior to the issuance of the order of injunction.

JUDGMENT :

RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J.

1. Petitioners have preferred this revision petition against the order dated 20.12.2018 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) Ludhiana vide which the application filed by the plaintiff/respondent for police help for compliance of order and the directions of the trial Court to get the vacant possession of ground floor of the suit property was allowed.

2. Brief facts are that the plaintiff/respondent filed a suit for possession of ground floor of the suit property by way of specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 17.05.2017 executed by the defendants/petitioners in favour of the plaintiff/respondent for the sale of entire property/two floors constructed in the suit property as detailed in the headnote of the plaint. Prayers for mandatory injunction and permanent injunction were also made besides seeking recovery of mesne profits till the date of handing over the vacant possession of the ground floor of the suit property with interest. Along with the suit, an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC for grant of ad interim injunction was also filed.

3. The trial Court vide order dated 27.04.2018 passed an interim order of status quo regarding possession for the suit property. Both the parties were directed to maintain status quo over the suit property except in due course of law till the next date of hearing. Plaintiff was also directed to obtain dasti summons in order to serve the defendants at his own responsibility, failing which the interim order was liable to be vacated automatically.

4. Thereafter, the aforesaid interim order was modified vide order dated 30.04.2018. In addition to the order dated 27.04.2018, both the parties were also directed to maintain status quo qua alienation of the suit property except in due course of law.

5. Thereafter, plaintiff filed an application on the ground that the defendants have transferred the possession of the ground floor of the suit property in favour of Amarjit Singh and his wife Sarabjit Kaur being their tenants on 04.05.2018 in violation of the orders dated 27.04.2018 and 30.04.2018 passed by the trial Court. Defendants had the knowledge of the aforesaid orders.

6. The defendants along with the aforesaid tenants also filed false complaints to the Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana against the plaintiff and his family members. Those complaints were found to be false. Plaintiff also moved complaint against the defendants to the Commissioner of Police as well as to the Punjab Human Rights Commission, wherein report of the DGP, Punjab was sought. The DGP, Punjab submitted his report dated 30.08.2018. The enquiries were conducted by the Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana and Bureau of Investigation, Chandigarh Punjab on 20.08.2018 and 01.10.2018. On the basis of aforesaid incriminating material, the application in question was filed before the trial Court.

7. The suit for specific performance for the possession of ground floor of the suit property on the basis of agreement to sell dated 17.05.2017 executed by the defendants in favour of the plaintiff/respondent is pending. In the said suit, directions have been sought to execute the sale deed for the entire suit property in favour of the plaintiff and for mandatory injunction directing the defendants to hand over the vacant possession of the suit property and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering into possession of the plaintiff over the first floor along with terrace of the suit property and from handing over the possession of the ground floor to anybody else except the plaintiff. Plaintiff-respondent is in possession of the first floor as well as terrace of the property, whereas defendants are in possession of the ground floor of the suit property.

8. Precisely for the aforesaid prayer, ex parte interim injunction dated 27.04.2018 was passed directing both the parties to maintain status quo regarding possession over the suit property and the order d