124

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

CR-2304-2022 (O&M)

Date of Decision: July 14, 2022

Rahul

...Petitioner

VERSUS

Pirthi Raj and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ARCHANA PURI

Present:

Mr.Rajinder Kumar, Advocate

for the petitioner.

****

ARCHANA PURI, J.

Challenge in the present revision petition is to the order dated

19.05.2022 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Fazilka, whereby, an

order dated 01.02.2022 passed by Learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Abohar,

has been reversed and the injunction application has been allowed.

Material facts, as culled out from the pleadings placed on the

record are that, initially, respondent No.1/plaintiff filed a suit for permanent

injunction against the present petitioner Rahul and performa respondents,

thereby restraining petitioner-defendant No.3 and performa defendants,

from interfering into the peaceful possession over the land measuring 16

Kanals 00 marla, comprised in Rect. No.94 Killa No.9 (8-0), 12 (8-0),

Khewat No.335/10, Khatauni No.651, as per Jamabandi for the year 2017-

18. Further restraint had also been sought from destroying/damaging the

Kinnow orchard and interfering in the cultivation and irrigation of the land

VINEET GULATI

2022.07.15 13:48

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this order/judgment

Chandigarh

CR-2304-2022

-2-

by the plaintiff. Along with the plaint, an application under Order 39 Rule 1

and 2 CPC was also filed.

Vide order dated 01.02.2022, at first instance, the application

under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC was dismissed by learned Civil Judge (Jr.

Divn.), Abohar, thereby making an observation that Khasra Girdawari had

been challenged before the Court of Assistant Collector-II, Khuian Sarwar

and order dated 23.09.2021 has been passed with regard to the correction of

Khasra Girdawari, whereby the said application has been consigned to

record room sine-die, till the final decision of the suit. It was further opined

that there was concealment of the material facts by the respondent/plaintiff,

with regard to the pendency of the application for correction of Khasra

Girdawari before the Court of Assistant Collector-II, Khuian Sarwar, while

filing the original suit. Hence, the application was dismissed.

Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order, an appeal was filed.

Vide impugned order dated 19.05.2022, the order passed by learned Civil

Judge (Jr. Divn.) was set aside and an application under Order 39 Rule 1

and 2 CPC, filed by the respondent-plaintiff was allowed. The present

petitioner and performa respondents were restrained from interfering into

the peaceful possession of the plaintiff over the suit property and further

restrained from destroying/damaging the Kinnow orchard and from

interfering in cultivation and irrigation of the said land by the plaintiff,

during the pendency of the main suit, illegally, forcibly, except in due

course of law.

Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 19.05.2022

passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Fazilka, petitioner Rahul, who was

impleaded as defendant No.3 before the lower Court, had filed the present

VINEET GULATI

2022.07.15 13:48

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this order/judgment

Chandigarh

CR-2304-2022

-3-

revision petition.

It is pertinent to mention that the suit in hand was filed on

23.07.2021. However, the order dated 23.09.2021 was passed by the

Assistant Collector-II, Khuian Sarwar, on the application for correction of

Khasra Girdawari, which was filed on 05.08.2021. In the light of the same,

it becomes evident that suit was filed much prior to the filing of an

application for correction of Khasra Girdawari, by Rahul and thus, wrong

observation had been made in the order passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr.

Divn.), about concealment of the pendency of application for correction of

the Khasra Girdawari, by the respondent-plaintiff Pirthi Raj.

As per the Jambandi of the suit property for the