132

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

CR-3985-2022 (O&M)

Date of Decision: September 19, 2022

Surinder Kansal and another

...Petitioners

VERSUS

Rakesh Rani and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ARCHANA PURI

Present:

Mr.Arpandeep Narula, Advocate

for the petitioners.

****

ARCHANA PURI, J.

Challenge in the present revision petition is to the order dated

13.06.2022 (Annexure P-1) passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.).

It is now submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that

the petitioners had filed a suit for declaration, thereby, asserting petitioner-

plaintiff No.1 to be owner in possession of the properties, as detailed in the

headnote of the plaint and also issuance of permanent injunction to restrain

the respondents/defendants, from interfering in their possession. Besides,

the same, even mandatory injunction, thereby, directing defendants No.1

and 2 to execute formal sale deeds of the property in dispute, in favour of

the plaintiffs, had been sought.

The copy of the plaint has been placed on record as Annexure

P-2. Annexure P-3 is the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with

151 CPC, filed along with the plaint. Therein also, the petitioners-plaintiffs

VINEET GULATI

2022.09.20 08:44

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this order/judgment

Chandigarh

CR-3985-2022

-2-

had made a prayer for issuance of ad interim injunction.

In pursuance of the suit having received by entrustment, during

the vacation period, an order dated 13.06.2022 was passed by the concerned

Court, which reads as follows:-

'Suit received by entrustment alongwith application to

entertain the present case being of urgent nature, during the

vacation. In view of the averments mentioned in the

application in hand stands allowed. Report of Reader seen.

It be registered. Alongwith the suit the ld. Counsel for the

plaintiff filed application u/o 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC. Heard

on point of exparte stay, no ground is made out to grant

exparte stay and this Court deems it fit to hear the opposite

party first to grant any injunction on the application. Now,

notice of the suit as well as stay application be issued to

defendants for 07.07.2022 on filing copy of plaint and copy of

stay application. Dasti summons if required be taken.'

Perusal of the aforesaid order reveals that no reason, as such,

has been assigned, as to what was the necessity to defer the issuance of

interim injunction, without issuance of notice to the defendants. However,

it was required on the part of the lower Court to state in brief, the reasons

for the adjournment further, while denying the ex-parte relief, at the initial

stage.

Not doing so, jeopardizes the right of the petitioner-plaintiff,

who had knocked the door of the Court.

Also, it is pertinent to mention that, as disclosed in the grounds

of revision petition, service of respondents-defendants has yet not been

effected. On enquiry by the Court, it has been disclosed that the next date

fixed is 21.10.2022.

Considering the reasons, having not been assigned by the lower

Court, the present revision petition is hereby allowed and order dated

13.06.2022 passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) in CS-321-2022 CNR

VINEET GULATI

2022.09.20 08:44

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this order/judgment

Chandigarh

CR-3985-2022

-3-

No.PBLDA00004122022 is set aside.

The concerned Court shall consider an application for ad

interim injunction afresh, on the next date already fixed and pass a speaking

order.

The present order is being passed, without notice to the

respondents and without affording them any opportunity of hearing, as the

order under revision was passed, at the inception stage of the suit and as this

Court has not gone into the merits of the case, one way or the other.

September 19, 2022

(ARCHANA PURI)

Vgulati

JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned

Yes

Whether reportable

Yes/No

VINEET GULATI

2022.09.20 08:44

I attest to