IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SURESHWAR THAKUR, KULDEEP TIWARI, JJ.
Surinder Singh Sandhu & Anr. – Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab & Ors. – Respondents
CWP-22590 of 2022
Decided On : 19-01-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court's authority and pending civil suit (Para 1) |
| 2. apex court's order on suit disposal (Para 2) |
| 3. prejudice from changes in suit property (Para 3) |
| 4. jurisdiction limitations on adjudication (Para 4) |
| 5. court's expectation for expeditious decision (Para 5) |
| 6. final disposition of the petition (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT
Sureshwar Thakur, J. (Oral)
The writ property is the subject matter of a civil suit bearing No.CS- 45658 of 2013. The said civil suit is sub-judice before the learned Civil Court concerned. During the pendency of the above-said civil suit, before the learned Civil Court concerned, on an application filed under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 by the plaintiffs/petitioners herein, before the learned Civil Court concerned, but thereons though, the learned Civil Judge concerned, though did not proceed to grant the asked for relief, but ordered that the litigants concerned, maintain status-quo qua the suit property. The above order led the petitioners herein to make a challenge thereto, through theirs instituting an appeal under Order 43 of CPC, before the learned Appellate Court concerned. However, the learned Appellate Court concerned, affirmed the order of status-quo, as became initially rendered by the learned Civil Judge concerned, on the plaintiffs' application, as became cast under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 CPC. Nonetheless, the defendants became aggrieved from the orders of status-quo, as became made initially, on the plaintiffs'/petitioners' herein, application cast under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 CPC, whereby both the Courts (supra), ordered for the litigants concerned, maintaining status-quo in respect of the suit property. Therefore, the defendants filed Civil Revision petition bearing No.371 of 2015, before this Court, whereons, the order, as made by the learned Additional District Judge, Ludhiana became quashed, and, set aside, by this Court, hence through an order made on 16.11.2017. Subsequently, the plaintiffs, in the civil suit (supra)/petitioners in the instant petition, became aggrieved from the verdict, as became drawn by this Court, in Civil Revision No.371 of 2015, as became preferred before this Court, at the instance of the defendants, in the civil suit concerned, through theirs instituting Special Leave Petition No.11629 of 2018 before the Hon'ble Apex Court. The Hon'ble Apex Court made thereons the hereinafter extracted order.
"Delay condoned.
We are informed that Suit No.45658 of 2013 (Surinder Singh v. Ajaib Singh) is pending before the JMIC, Ludhiana. We direct the Court to dispose of the suit expeditiously. We make it clear that any transfers/subsequent transfers of the properties referred to in the plaint schedule shall be subject to the outcome of the suit and the registering authority concerned shall make it so clear in the Transfer Deeds."
2. A reading of the above order, discloses that the Hon'ble Apex Court, had made a direction upon the learned Civil Judge concerned, to make an expeditious decision in accordance with law, upon the civil suit concerned, but it did not cast any omnibus embargo nor it made any restriction, upon, the litigants concerned to, during the pendency of the civil suit concerned, make alienations of the suit property, but yet the above permitted alienations were rather yet made subject to the outcome of the suit, and, with a direction to the Registering Authority, that the said Registering Authority shall make a reflection in the above regard in the Transfer Deeds concerned. It appears that in the face of the above extracted order, as made by the Hon'ble Apex Court, some alienations of the suit property occurred, at the instance of the defendants in the civil suit rather qua the alienee concerned. The above alienations resulted in the drawing of Annexure P-16, wherethrough the Competent Authority proceeded to draw an order qua change of land user in favour of the applicants therein, but made it clear that the said drawings of CLU, would be subject to the outcome of the
AI
The trial Court exceeded its jurisdiction by issuing directions beyond the application’s scope, but the status quo regarding the property must be maintained until the main suit is resolved.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for eviction in accordance with the law and the limitations of lease/patta, emphasizing the statutory rights of the government over the la....
The court upheld the status quo regarding property pending adjudication, emphasizing protection against dispossession.
The court emphasized the necessity of maintaining status quo in property disputes until final resolution, reinforcing prior judicial orders.
Point of law: Validity of, and effect of S. 52 – Doctrine of lis pendens is based on ground that it is necessary for administration of justice that decision of a court in a suit should be binding not....
The court upheld the trial court's jurisdiction to entertain a civil suit for declaration of customary rights, emphasizing the importance of maintaining legal procedures during appeals.
The presence of all co-defendants is essential in partition suits to ensure comprehensive adjudication of property rights; exoneration without full consideration threatens legal integrity.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.