Dismissed

Harcharan Singh v. Darshan Singh and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC21 May 2012CR/3067/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Civil Revision filed against orders granting temporary injunction in a suit for permanent injunction restraining carving out underground drains in suit land. High Court dismissed the revision as meriting no interference, holding lower courts rightly granted injunction due to plaintiff's strong prima facie case and lack of material regarding drain existence, while reserving opinion on suit merits.

What did the court decide?

Revision petition dismissed in limine without deciding merits of the suit.

Harcharan Singh Vs Darshan Singh and Anr. — Property and Title | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CIVIL REVISION NO.3067 OF 2012 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION : 21st MAY 2012

Harcharan Singh

…. Petitioner

Versus

Darshan Singh Khera & another

¶7

…. Respondents

¶8

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL

¶9

¶10

Present : Mr. Prateek Pandit, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

¶12

L. N. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

¶13

CM No.13464-CII of 2012

¶14

Allowed as prayed for.

¶15

CIVIL REVISION NO.3067 OF 2012

¶16

Defendant No.2-Harcharan Singh has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning order dated 28.11.2011 Annexure P-2 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kapurthala and judgment dated 03.02.2012 Annexure P-1 passed by learned District Judge, Kapurthala thereby granting temporary injunction to respondent No.1-plaintiff Darshan Singh Khera.

¶17

Respondent No.1-plaintiff has filed suit against proforma respondent No.2-Gram Panchayat as defendant No.1 and petitioner Harcharan Singh as defendant No.2 alleging that the plaintiff and other cosharers are owners in possession of the suit land but defendant No.2 without any right wants to carve out drain by laying under ground drainage pipes for dirty water through the suit land. Defendants have no right to do so. Plaintiff, accordingly, sought permanent injunction restraining the defendants from

¶18

CR No.3067 of 2012(O&M)

¶19

- 2 -

¶20

doing so. Temporary injunction to the same effect during pendency of the suit was also claimed by the plaintiff by moving separate application.

¶21

Defendants resisted the suit and the application for temporary injunction and pleaded that drain is already passing through the suit land constructed by Gram Panchayat in the year 1993-94 and now the drain is being made pucca with concrete. Defendant No.2 also set up right or easement. Various other pleas were also raised.

¶22

Learned trial Court vide impugned order Annexure P-2 allowed the application of plaintiff for temporary injunction and restrained the defendants from raising/carving out any underground drain in the suit land except in due course of law. Appeal against the said order preferred by defendant No.2 has been dismissed by learned District Judge vide impugned judgment Annexure P-2. Feeling aggrieved, defendant No.2 has filed this revision petition.

¶23

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the

¶24

case file.

¶25

Counsel for the petitioner contended that the drain is already in existence through the suit land and defendant No.2 and some other residents of more than ten houses have been using this drain for more than five generations and have right of easement. However, there is no material on record to substantiate this version of the defendants. Defendant No.1-Gram Panchayat has rather pleaded in preliminary objection No.1 of its written statement Annexure P-5 that the drain is already in existence and the Gram Panchayat is only putting concrete in the already existing drain, which has been constructed in the year 1993-94. This plea by defendant No.1-Gram Panchayat depicts that even according to defendant No.1, the alleged drain is not existing for 20 years or more preceding the filing of the suit. Even

¶26

CR No.3067 of 2012(O&M)

¶27

- 3 -

¶28

otherwise there is no material on record to depict that any such drain is at all existing in the suit land and if so since when.

¶29

In addition to the aforesaid, even if any such drain is existing through the suit land, even then defendants have no right whatsoever to lay underground pipes through the suit land, which is owned by plaintiff and other cosharers. Defendants have no right, title or interest whatsoever in the suit land. Consequently the defendants do not have even right to enter upon the suit land.

¶30

Plaintiff has a strong prima facie case. Balance of convenience is also in his favour because the defendants threatened to invade the land owned by plaintiff and other cosharers. Obviously plaintiff would suffer irreparable loss and injury if temporary injunction is not granted to him. Plaintiff has made out all the three necessary ingredients for grant of temporary injunction. Plaintiff has a very strong case for temporary injunction whereas defendants have no prima facie case whatsoever.

¶31

For the reasons aforesaid, I have no hesitation in concluding that the courts below have rightly granted temporary injunction to the plaintiff. There is no infirmity, much less illegality, perversity or jurisdictional error in impugned orders of the Courts below so as to call for interference by this Court in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The revision petition is completely meritless and is, therefore, dismissed in limine.

¶32

However, nothing observed hereinbefore shall be construed as expression of opinion on merits of the suit.

¶33

(L. N. MITTAL) JUDGE

¶34

21^st May, 2012 ‘raj’

Harcharan Singh v. Darshan Singh and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harcharan Singh v. Darshan Singh and Anr.

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

(O&M) Oriental Ins. Co. Ltd. Vs Karam Singh Sidhu

Atam Parkash Vs Bhushan Kumar Mukheja

Sushil Kumar Vs Ravinder Kaur

Parvinder Kumar Vs Surjan Singh and Others

Saurabh Gupta Vs Isha Gupta

Manjit Singh and Anr. Vs Badri Nath and Ors.