Allowed

Rajwinder Singh and Anr. v. Shubham Sood

Punjab & Haryana HC3 Aug 2022CR/4065/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the civil revision petition and set aside the trial Court's interlocutory order directing defendants to restore possession. The Court directed the trial Court to frame an issue regarding willful violation of the status quo order and hold evidence before deciding on restoration.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order directing restoration of possession is set aside. The trial court is directed to frame an issue and permit parties to lead evidence.

Rajwinder Singh and Anr. Vs Shubham Sood — Landlord and Tenant | Punjab & Haryana HC (2022)

¶1

110

¶2

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh

¶3

Civil Revision No. 4065 of 2017 (O&M)

¶4

Date of Decision: 03.08.2022

¶5

Rajwinder Singh and Another

... Petitioner(s)

Versus Shubham Sood

... Respondent(s)

CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kshetarpal. Present: Mr. H.S.Dhindsa, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Saurabh Singla, Advocate for Mr. Pardeep Bajaj, Advocate for the respondent.

¶10

Anil Kshetarpal, J.

¶11

The defendants, in a suit for permanent injunction, assail the interlocutory order passed by the learned trial Court on 17.05.2017, directing them to restore possession of the suit property to the plaintiff. The direction to restore the possession has been issued on the premise that the defendants have violated the order of injunction ( status quo ). The interim order to maintain status quo , passed by the Court in a pending suit, cannot be construed as final adjudication regarding the possession by the plaintiff. This is only an interlocutory order passed by the learned trial Court while deciding the suit. In the absence of concrete evidence to prove that the interim order passed by the Court has been willfully violated by the defendants, the Court was not required to pass an order directing the

¶12

DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ restoration of possession.

¶13

2022.08.05 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶14

Civil Revision No. 4065 of 2017 (O&M) 2

¶15

It has been brought to the notice of the Court that an application filed by the plaintiff (respondent herein) under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, alleging willful violation has already been dismissed not only by the learned trial Court, but by the learned First Appellate Court as well.

¶16

Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the present revision petition is allowed and the order, under challenge, is set aside. The learned trial Court is directed to frame an issue and permit the parties to lead evidence. Thereafter, while adjudicating the suit, the Court will form an opinion as to whether the plaintiff was dispossessed despite the order of status quo. If the learned trial Court comes to the aforesaid conclusion, it shall be open for the Court to order restoration.

¶17

(Anil Kshetarpal) Judge August 03, 2022 “DK” Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶18

DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2022.08.05 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Rajwinder Singh and Anr. v. Shubham Sood

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajwinder Singh and Anr. v. Shubham Sood

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

M/S Karna Paints Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Rajit Paints Ltd. & Ors.

Sharda Ram Vs Mahender Singh & Ors.

Phoolwati Vs State of Haryana and Others

Employees Provident Fund Organization Vs M/S Darshan Forgings Pvt. Ltd.

Punjab Financial Corporation Vs Official Liquidator(M/S Darshan Forging P. Ltd.)

Ashok Kumar Aneja Vs Raj Kumari Aneja and Others