Posted On by &filed under High Court, Punjab-Haryana High Court.

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Smt.Vidhyawati And Another vs Manoj And Others on 18 November, 2011
CR No.7069/2011                                                1



                                        CR No.7069/2011
                                        Date of decision: 18.11.2011.

Smt.Vidhyawati and another

Manoj and others


Coram: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh

Present: Mr.BS Rana,Advocate for the petitioners.

Jaswant Singh.J.(Oral)

Plaintiffs/petitioners in the present revision petition under
Article 227 of the Constitution have assailed the order dated 8.11.2011
(P3) whereby the learned appellate court in the application under Order
41 Rule 5 CPC filed alongwith the appeal by the defendants
challenging the injunction granted in favour of the plaintiffs/petitiones
vide order dated 4.11.2011 has stayed the operation of the injunction
order granted by the trial court while issuing notice on the interim stay
for 24.11.2011.

It is submitted that trial court on the injunction application
under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs on
the basis of the material placed on record found the petitioners/
plaintiffs to be in possession and thus granted injunction in their favour
restraining the defendants from interfering in their possession with
further permission to plaintiffs/petitioners to harvest their standing
crops and if need be, to seek police help as well.

CR No.7069/2011 2

Learned counsel submits that keeping in view the urgency of
the matter, as the crop being perishable commodity, the
plaintiffs/petitioners have subsequently made an application on
8.11.2011 before the learned appellate court seeking early hearing of
the interim stay application listed for 24.11.2011 or in the alternative
permitting them to harvest the standing crop.

At the time of arguments, learned counsel for the plaintiffs/
petitioners submits that in the facts of the case, the plaintiffs would be
satisfied if the learned appellate court is directed to dispose of the
interim stay application expeditiously in view of the possibility that the
standing crop may not be destroyed. It is further undertaken that the
petitioners would not take any adjournment beyond 24.11.2011 before
the learned appellate court.

The prayer being made by the learned counsel for the
plaintiffs/ petitioners is reasonable and hence accepted. Accordingly,
the present revision petition, in view of the aforesaid undertaking that
petitioners would not take further adjournment beyond 24.11.2011, is
disposed of with a direction to the learned appellate court to decide the
application under Order 41 Rule 5 CPC expeditiously and preferably
within one week commencing 24.11.2011.

Disposed of in the above terms.

18.11.2011                                 (Jaswant Singh)
joshi                                          Judge

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

107 queries in 0.152 seconds.