IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CR No.5849 of 2009
Decided on : 13.10.2009
Labh Singh & others ... Petitioners
versus
Manohar Singh ...Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI
Present : Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate
for the appellant.
****
1.Whether Reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see
the judgment?
2.To be referred to the reporters or not?
3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
AJAY TEWARI, J. (ORAL)
This petition has been filed against the order of the
Courts below granting temporary injunction in favour of the
respondent regarding the protection of his possession over the
71 kanals 11 marlas of land. While the ld. Trial Court granted him
absolute injunction, the ld. Appellate Court has modified it and
limited it to 67 kanals odd and ordered status quo with regard to
approximately 4 kanals 19 marlas of land. The only argument of
the learned counsel for the petitioners is that in the revenue
record the land is described as joint. However, in my opinion,
both the Courts below have dealt with not only the revenue
record but also the attendant circumstances and have to rightly
hold that the respondent has been able to establish, prima facie
his possession over 67 kanals odd land, the details of which had
been given in the order of the ld. Appellate Court.
CR No.5849 of 2009 -2-
Learned counsel for the petitioners has further argued
that the finding of the Lower Appellate Court i.e. the petitioners
are not the owner of any land in the said joint Khata of 99 Kanals
5 marlas, is not based on any record.
In my opinion, the said finding, having been recorded
in an interlocutory order, would have no effect when the final
order is to be passed. It is further clarified that the injunction
would be restricted to 67 kanals odd land and the status quo
would be with respect to 4 kanals 19 marlas of land.
With these observations, this revision petition is
dismissed.
October 13, 2009 (AJAY TEWARI) sonia JUDGE