WP No.9004/2010
Bal Kishan Agrawal Vinay Kumar Jain
12.8.2010.
WP No.9004/2010
Bal Kishan Agrawal Vinay Kumar Jain
18.8.2010
Shri Ashish Shroti and Shri Vikram Johri, counsel for the
petitioner.
Shri Amaresh Mishra, counsel for respondents.
This petition is directed against an order dated 11.8.2008
Annexure P/5 passed by Second Civil Judge Class I, Umariya in
Civil Suit No.54-A/2008 by which an application filed by the
petitioner under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C was rejected and
the order dated 4.2.2010 in Annexure P/6 by the Additional
District Judge (Fast Track), Umariya in Civil Misc. Appeal
no.13/2009 by which the appeal preferred against the order
Annexure P/5 was dismissed.
Both the Courts below recorded concurrent findings in the
case and have found that the petitioner failed to make out a prima
facies case, balance of convenience, irreprable loss in his favour
and rejected the application, filed by the plaintiff for issuance of
temporary injunction during the pendency of the suit.
On 20.7.2010, while issuing notices in the petition, we
directed that respondents shall maintain status quo as on today in
respect of the disputed land and shall not raise any further
construction over the land without seeking prior permission of this
Court..
The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the
construction is complete and in case any further construction is
raised, the respondents shall seek permission of the Court before
raising such construction.
In view of the aforesaid, this petition is finally disposed of
with following directions:
(I) The ad interim writ issued on 20.7.2010 to continue
for a further period of six months from today.
WP No.9004/2010
Bal Kishan Agrawal Vinay Kumar Jain
(II) In the meantime, the trial Court shall make an
endeavour to decide the suit expeditiously.
No order as to cost..
(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (J.K.Maheshwari)
Judge Judge
JLL