Police must follow legal procedures in property disputes, and Civil Courts should decide cases expeditiously to avoid financial loss.

JUDGMENT :

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J.

1. The short point involved in this petition is “whether the police officials, in the garb of maintaining law and order qua a property, which is subject matter of two pending civil suits before Civil Court, between two real brothers, can put its own lock and hand over key to MHC of police station, without taking recourse either under Sections 145/146 Cr.P.C. or Order 40 Rule 1 CPC for appointment of a receiver, or such action of police amount to colourable exercise of power, thereby overreaching the powers of Civil Court, which has even granted stay in favour of one party.”

2. Prayer in this petition is for quashing of enquiry report dated 09.08.2017 submitted by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Central, Jalandhar as well as the order dated 24.08.2017 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police (investigation), Jalandhar for Commissioner of Police, Jalandhar and to further hand over the inquiry to an officer not below the rank of I.G. Police outside Jalandhar Range, as the local police authorities are favouring respondent No.10 with regard to a shop in dispute.

3. Brief facts of the case are that one shop bearing No.EF-62 (B VII/743) situated in Mandi Fanton Ganj, Jalandhar was originally owned by Avtar Singh, who was real paternal uncle of petitioner Surinder Jit Singh as well as respondent No.10 Narinder Pal Singh. Said Avtar Singh bequeathed the shop in favour of his brother late Mohinder Singh by way of the Will, who was father of the petitioner as well as respondent No.10. After the death of Avtar Singh, Mohinder Singh became exclusive owner of the shop on the basis of Will, which was upheld in a judgment and decree dated 03.10.1980 passed by the Sub Judge, Jalandhar.

4. Later on, by way of registered Will dated 12.06.1989, Mohinder Singh bequeathed the shop in favour of his wife Mohinder Kaur (mother of the petitioner as well as respondent No.10). Since part of the property was on rent with M/s Aggarwal Brothers, Mohinder Kaur filed a petition for ejectment, in which she had succeeded and the possession was handed over to her as per order of this Court on 31.10.2013. Thereafter, Mohinder Kaur became owner in exclusive possession of the building. It is further case of the petitioner that on 25.08.2014, mother of the petitioner Mohinder Kaur sold the property to the petitioner, as it required reconstruction. Total sale consideration was Rs.1.00 crore. The petitioner paid Rs.40 lacs as earnest money by way of a cheque and two sale deeds were registered on 16.12.2016 for Rs.50 lacs on payment of stamp duty of Rs.4.50 lacs and fee of Rs.1,05,300/- and the second sale deed was registered on 03.07.2015 for a consideration of Rs.50 lacs bearing equal stamp duty and fee. The petitioner claimed to be owner of the entire property in dispute. Thereafter, the sale consideration was kept in an FDR by mother of the petitioner and she enjoyed the interest till her death in the year 2020. It is further stated that after the earnest money was paid, the property was demolished and reconstruction started in the year 2014 and respondent No.10 started interfering in the construction being raised by the petitioner, who was given possession at the time of payment of earnest money. The petitioner, thereafter, filed a civil suit bearing No.2370/2014 praying for a decree of permanent injunction to restrain respondent No.10 from interfering in the possession. The Civil Court, vide order dated 04.11.2014, allowed the application by making the following observations: -

“...So, plaintiff is having a prima-facie case in his favour. Moreover, the balance of convenience is also in favour of plaintiff as if the defendant is not stopped from interfering into the construction being carried out by plaintiff, it will cause an irreparable loss to the plaintiff. So, all the three ingredients for granting injunction are fulfilled in the present case. “Hence, the defendant No.1 is restrained from interfering into the constructio