Disposed¶17

Saurav v. Balwinder Kumar and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Jul 2025CR/3527/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CR No.3527 of 2025, decided 11.07.2025 by Vikram Aggarwal, J (Punjab and Haryana High Court). Petition under Article 227 against non-grant of ex parte injunction dated 26.05.2025 by Civil Judge (JD), Kharar in Civil Suit No.448 of 2025 (Saurav Vs. Balwinder Kumar), partition suit with Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC application. Prayer restricted to time-bound decision of interim relief application; no laxity found; petition disposed of with direction to decide Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 application expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kharar to hear and decide the application filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 expeditiously. ¶17

Saurav Vs Balwinder Kumar and Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

(111) CR No.3527 of 2025 Date of Decision: 11.07.2025

¶3

Saurav …Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

Balwinder Kumar and others …Respondents

¶6

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL

¶7

Present: Mr. Arun Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner (through video conference).

¶8

¶9

VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J (ORAL)

¶10

This is a petition preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing order dated 26.05.2025 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kharar vide which ex parte injunction was not granted.

¶11

The petitioner-plaintiff instituted a suit (Annexure P-7) for separate possession by way of partition of suit land (fully described in the plaint) situated in the Revenue Estate of Village Dusarna, Teshil Kharar, District SAS Nagar Mohali. Permanent injunction restraining the defendants from alienating or changing the nature of the suit property was also sought. Along with the suit, an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC (Annexure P-6) was also moved. Upon the suit having been presented, the trial Court chose to issue notice to the other side for the very next day i.e. 17.04.2025. On 17.04.2025, the trial Court recorded that it would hear the opposite party before the grant of ad interim injunction. Thereafter, the matter remained pending for service of the defendants which is stated to have been completed in the last date of hearing i.e. 07.07.2025.

¶12

REKHA SHARMA 2025.07.17 22:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

¶13

CR No.3527 of 2025

¶14

-2-

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner restricts his prayer to the issuance for a direction to the Court concerned to hear and decide the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC in a time bound manner.

¶16

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the interlocutory orders placed on record, this Court does not find any laxity on the part of the Court in dealing with the matter. However, the matter is now stated to have been adjourned to 27.08.2025. It has to be borne in mind that valuable rights of parties are involved, and therefore, prayers for interim relief should be dealt with expeditiously.

¶17

That being so, the present revision petition is disposed of with a direction to the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kharar where Civil Suit No.448 of 2025 i.e. Saurav Vs. Balwinder Kumar to hear and decide the application filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 expeditiously.

¶18

	(VIKRAM AGGARWAL) JUDGE
July 11, 2025
Rekha
Whether speaking/reasoned	: Yes/No
Whether reportable	: Yes/No

¶19

REKHA SHARMA 2025.07.17 22:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

Saurav v. Balwinder Kumar and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saurav v. Balwinder Kumar and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hazari Lal Vs Muni Kumar & Ors.

Smt Omwati and Ors. Vs Smt Prem Lata Deceased Thr Lrs and Anr.

Dharampal Vs Satbir Alias Bhira

Reliance Asset Reconstruction Company Limited Vs Manoj Kumar Tehsildar Cum Executive Magistrate

M/S Brij Lal , Govt. Contractor Vs Krishan Kumar IAS and Others

Chander Singh Vs Anand Mohan Sharan, IAS and Anr.