PRAVEEN KUMAR SHARMA Vs. SUDHANSHU MISHRA PATHAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the parties have agreed to dispose of this writ petition at the admission stage.

(3.) BRIEF facts of the case, as narrated in the writ petition, are that respondent plaintiff filed a suit No. 627/2009 against the petitioner-defendant before the Court of Civil Judge (S.D.), Dehradun, for a decree of mandatory injunction directing the petitioner to deliver the possession of the property in question to the respondent plaintiff and further sought decree for damages for illegal use and occupation of the property and also sought decree for perpetual injunction restraining the petitioner from interfering in peaceful possession, use and enjoyment of respondent over the property in question. The plaintiff respondent alleged that Ms. Manjula Devendra, sister of the respondent, was in permissive possession of the property in question on behalf of the plaintiff. The respondent plaintiff revoked the permission granted to Ms. Manjula Devendra and filed a suit No. 226/2001 for possession of the property which was consequently decreed vide judgment and decree dated 16-2-2004 and the said decree was put into execution and consequently the decree was executed on 24-5-2008 and possession was delivered to the respondent-plaintiff. On 25-5-2008, Ms. Manjula Devendra dispossed the plaintiff from property in question and entered the property and thereafter delivered the possession to the petitioner-defendant. Thereafter the respondent-plaintiff asked the petitioner defendant to vacate the premises and consequently filed a suit No. 627/2009 against the petitioner defendant.