Satbir Singh & Anr. Vs Gram Panchayat Vill. Jatola & Ores

Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 8.2.2010 passed by the learned Additional District Judge Sonepat vide which order dated 23.11.2009 of learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Divn.) Sonepat was upheld and petitioners’ application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 was dismissed.

¶12

Petitioners in the present case have filed a suit for permanent injunction claiming that though the land in question is owned by respondent No.1 i.e. Gram Panchayat but the plaintiffs-petitioners are in possession thereon for the last 50 years and the Gram Panchayat was threatening to dispossess the plaintiffs-petitioners forcibly and illegally.

¶13

Both the Courts below found that the petitioners had not been able to produce any material on record to prima facie establish that possession on the suit land was of the plaintiffs-petitioners. From the revenue record, it was established that Gram Panchayat was owner in possession on the suit land. The Gram Panchayat had passed a resolution for construction of dispensary at the site which was for the benefit of the inhabitants of the village.

¶14

With this material on record, I am of the opinion that no illegality has been committed by the courts below in dismissing the application for interim stay. No ground for interference with impugned order is made out. Dismissed.

¶15

[Rajesh Bindal] Judge

¶16

09.3.2010

¶17

sd

Satbir Singh & Anr. v. Gram Panchayat Vill. Jatola & Ores

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satbir Singh & Anr. v. Gram Panchayat Vill. Jatola & Ores

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nazim Singh Vs Baggu Singh & Ors.

Gurvinder Singh Vs Gurmeet Kaur and Anr.

Hawa Singh Vs Daya Nand

Mahesh Kumar Sehgal Vs U.T.Chd

Gul Devi & Anr. Vs Surjit Singh & Ors.

(O&M) Didar Singh Vs U.T.Chandigarh