PRATAP AND ANOTHER Vs. ANIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioners against the order dated 23.01.2015, passed by Addl. District Judge, Laksar, District Haridwar, whereby the said court has quashed the order dated 24.03.2012, passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Laksar, District Haridwar in O.S. no. 91 of 2011, Pawan vs Pratap and another and allowed the appeal filed by the plaintiff-appellant Pawan (respondent herein) restraining the defendants (petitioners herein) not to interfere in the peaceful possession of the property in suit.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the respondent filed suit for prohibitory injunction, being O.S. no. 91 of 2011, Pawan vs Pratap and another, stating therein that the plaintiff (respondent herein) is the owner in possession of the land bearing khasra no. 309, measuring 0.03 Hectare and Khasra no. 315, measuring 0.36 Hectare situated at Mauja Village Kalsia, Pargana Gordhanpur, Tehsil Laksar, District Haridwar and his sugarcane crop is standing over said land. It is contended that the petitioners (defendants) are threatening to dispossess the respondent (plaintiff) and to take illegal possession over the land in dispute and to harvest the crop. The petitioners (defendants) put in appearance and filed their objections, stating that the plaintiff is not in possession over the property in dispute and the defendants are in possession over the property in dispute. It is contended that a suit was filed by the petitioners for declaration of the bhumidhari rights under Section 229B of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act., which was dismissed and the appeal is pending. It is further contended that status quo order has been granted by the learned Addl. Commissioner, Garhwal Division, Pauri in the aforesaid appeal.

(3.) I have heard leaned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.