Shri Ajay Singh vs Shri Harilal Chauhan

By means of the instant petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has challenged the validity of an order dated 28.01.2025, passed by learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Hawali, Lucknow in Original Suit No.1673 of 2023, whereby the petitioner's application praying for restraining the defendant from interfering in possession of the petitioner over the land in dispute as also for restraining him from transferring the property, has been rejected primarily on the ground that the petitioner is not in possession of the property in dispute.

¶11

The petitioner had challenged the aforesaid order by filing Misc. Civil Appeal No.62 of 2025, which has been dismissed by means of a judgement and order dated 12.09.2025, passed by learned Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), Court No.5, Lucknow and the petitioner has assailed the validity of the appellate order also.

¶12

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner had filed a suit for recovery of possession and even though the temporary injunction application erroneously prayed for an injunction restraining the defendant from interfering in possession of the petitioner, which admittedly is not with the petitioner, the further prayer made in temporary injunction application for restraining the defendant from transferring the property in suit pending disposal of the suit, ought to have been decided on its merits and this prayer could not have been rejected merely on the ground that the petitioner is not in possession of the property in suit.

¶13

A227 No. 6479 of 2025

¶14

2

¶15

The petitioner claims to have purchased the land in dispute through a registered sale deed date 10.11.2003 from Grih Laxmi Sahkari Awas Samiti, which in turn had purchased the land from its original tenure holder Sri Gangaram through a sale deed dated 05.03.1998. On 02.12.1999 Sri Gangaram executed a power of attorney in favour of Zahid Hussain, who executed a sale deed dated 06.12.1999 in respect of a portion of the land in question in favour of Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Sahkari Awas Samiti Limited. The opposite party/defendant claims to have purchased 2120 square feet land through a sale deed dated 18.12.1999 from Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Sahkari Awas Samiti Limited.

¶16

By means of an order dated 01.03.2013, passed under Section 166 and 167 of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 the Sub Divisional Magistrate had declared the sale deed 06.12.1999 executed by Gangaram in favour of Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Sahkari Awas Samiti Limited to be null and void. Thereafter, the petitioner's name was mutated in the records by means of an order dated 07.12.2013 and a declaration under Section 143 of U.P.Z.A.L.R. Act was made on 04.12.2014. However, the defendant/opposite party has trespassed on a portion of the land about 4500 square feet and has raised certain construction thereon.

¶17

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that when the petitioner has filed a suit for recovery of possession and admittedly the petitioner is not in possession of the property, mere erroneous request made in the application for temporary injunction for protecting his possession is not of any consequence and the petitioner's request for restraining the defendant/opposite party from creating any third party rights during pendency of the suit ought to have been considered on its merits.

¶18

The aforesaid submission of the petitioner make out a case for restraining the defendant-opposite party from creating any third party rights in the property in dispute.

¶19

The matter requires detailed consideration.

¶20

Issue notice to the opposite party, returnable at an early date.

¶21

Steps for service of notice shall be taken by the petitioner within three working days.

¶22

List this case in the week commencing 05.01.2026.

¶23

Keeping in view the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner as an interim measure, it is provided that till the next date of listing

¶24

A227 No. 6479 of 2025

¶25

3

¶26

the opposite party shall not create any third party interest in respect of the property in dispute in Original Suit No.1673 of 2023: Ajay Singh Vs. Harilal Chauhan.

¶27

November 6, 2025 Ram.

¶28

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

¶29

Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shri Ajay Singh v. Shri Harilal Chauhan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Ajay Singh v. Shri Harilal Chauhan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Karam Chandra Patel Vs Sachiv, Indus Tawar Limited

Indrajeet Vs Civil Judge S.D. Court No. 2 Dist. Hardoi and 4 Others

Rizwana Vs Estate of Late Nizam Ahmad Distt. Sultanpur and 2 Others

Durgesh Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow and Ors.

Rithik Gupta and 10 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Technical Edu. Lko. and 3 Others

Ram Kali vs Kallahu and 12 Others