Raj Kumar and Anr. Vs Gram Panchayat… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Raj Kumar and Anr. Vs Gram Panchayat… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of on consensus between the parties; trial Court requested to decide the suit of the year 2016 as expeditiously as possible; interim order dated 27.04.2017 to continue in operation till the suit is decided, without being construed as an expression on the merits.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 09.09.2016 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Div.), Sohna and the order dated 22.12.2016 dismissing the petitioners' appeal passed by the Additional District Judge, Gurgaon are liable to be set aside.

Court's answer

Consensus having been arrived at between the parties during the course of arguments, the present petition is disposed of with observations-directions.

Ratio / Principle

Trial Court requested to decide the suit of the year 2016 as expeditiously as possible, with learned counsel appearing before the trial Court to fully assist in its expeditious disposal.

Key takeaways

The interim order dated 27.04.2017 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court shall continue in operation till the time the suit is decided.ratio¶¶25
The grant and continuance of the interim order shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case; the trial Court shall decide the case independently in accordance with law after hearing all the parties concerned.ratio¶¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India (CR-2948-2017, Punjab & Haryana High Court, decided 18.03.2025) by Raj Kumar and another against Municipal Corporation, Gurugram and others, challenging the order dated 09.09.2016 (Annexure P-1) of the Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Div.), Sohna and the order dated 22.12.2016 of the Additional District Judge, Gurgaon dismissing the petitioners' appeal. On consensus between the parties, the petition was disposed of with directions: the trial Court to decide the suit of the year 2016 as expeditiously as possible with full assistance from counsel; and the interim order dated 27.04.2017 of the Coordinate Bench staying dispossession except in due course of law to continue in operation till the suit is decided, such grant and continuance not to be construed as an expression on the merits, the trial Court to decide the case independently in accordance with law after hearing all parties.

CR-2948-2017

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CR-2948-2017

Date of decision : 18.03.2025

Raj Kumar and another

... Petitioners

Versus

Municipal Corporation, Gurugram and others ... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL

Present: Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr.Jagdish Manchanda, Addl.A.G. Haryana.

Mr.Harish Rana, Advocate for Mr.Anil Kumar Rana, Advocate for respondents no.4 to 33.

VIKAS BAHL, J.(ORAL)

This is a Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the impugned order dated 09.09.2016 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Div.), Sohna and for setting aside the order dated 22.12.2016 vide which the appeal filed by the petitioners has been dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Gurgaon.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in the present case, the dispossession of the petitioners except in due course of law was stayed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 27.04.2017 and the said interim order is continuing till date.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents have submitted

Davinder Kumar 2025.03.19 17:26 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order / judgment

CR-2948-2017

2

that the present suit is of the year 2016 and at this stage, they would be satisfied in case the trial Court is directed to decide the suit as expeditiously as possible. It is further submitted that the grant and continuance of interim order should not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the trial Court be directed to decide the case independently, in accordance with law.

During the course of arguments, consensus has been arrived at between the parties and on the basis of said consensus, the present petition is disposed of with the following observations-directions:-

i) The trial Court is requested to decide the suit which is of the year 2016 as expeditiously as possible. Learned counsel appearing before the trial Court are also requested to fully assist the trial Court in expeditious disposal of the suit.

ii) The interim order dated 27.04.2017 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court would continue in operation till the time the suit is decided. The grant and continuance of the said order would not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the trial Court would decide the case independently in accordance with law after hearing all the parties concerned.

(VIKAS BAHL) JUDGE

March 18, 2025. Davinder Kumar

Whether speaking / reasoned Whether reportable

Yes/No Yes/No

Davinder Kumar 2025.03.19 17:26 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order / judgment