This judgment dismisses a writ petition seeking to quash an order declining interim injunction against dispossession. The court noted the land is recorded under the Gram Panchayat with no partition of rights, finding no basis for interference.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CWP No.12372 of 2013
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.12372 of 2013 Date of decision: 08.07.2013
Umrao Singh and others
…..Petitioners
versus
The Collector and another
……Respondents
CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh Hon’ble Mr.Justice G.S.Sandhawalia
Present: Mr.Mahavir Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioners
Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral)
This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to quash an order dated 10.9.2012 vide which application filed by the petitioners for grant of interim injunction staying their dispossession was dismissed.
It is on record that the petitioners filed a title suit allegedly in a representative capacity, claiming ownership of the property described in the plaint, in the year 2007. They also filed an application for grant of interim injunction which was declined vide the impugned order. It is further on record that in the title suit evidence is being recorded and the Collector, Ambala had directed that let it be completed within two months vide the impugned order. Court has declined relief to the petitioners by taking note of a fact that in the revenue record, land is shown in the name of the Gram Panchayat as owner and Makbuja vashingan-deh i.e. all residents of the
CWP No.12372 of 2013 2
village are shown in possession of the same. The said entry appears to be innocuous. If the petitioners are claiming stay of their dispossession they are supposed to be shown in possession of specific khasra Nos. No partition has been effected between the right holders and anybody else till today. It is also not case of the petitioners that they had effected any partition of suit land, probably it may not be possible because the land is shown in the name of the Gram Panchayat as owner. At an earlier point of time, the petitioners and other right holders had filed a civil suit stating that they are owners of the land in dispute and a prayer was made that Gram Panchayat be restrained from allotting 100 square yards plots to the members of the weaker section of the society under the Mahatma Gandhi Gramin Basti Yojna. That suit was dismissed. Appeal filed by the right holders was also dismissed.
In view of facts mentioned above, no case is made out for
interference.
The writ petition stands dismissed.
(Jasbir Singh) Judge 08.07.2013 (G.S.Sandhawalia) gk Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere when the revenue record shows the land as owned by the Gram Panchayat and residents in possession, precluding a partition between potential right holders.
Whether the petitioners have made out a case for stay of dispossession in a representative capacity where no partition has been effected.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Umrao Singh and others
The Collector
Jasbir Singh
G. S. Sandhawalia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
