MATAWAR PRASAD Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE SHRAVASTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the orders impugned.

(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 18.9.2019 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Shravasti, rejecting the application of the petitioner for temporary injunction in Regular Suit No.36/2017 ( Matawar Prasad vs. Jagdish and others ) and the order dated 13.1.2020 passed by the District Judge, Shrawasti in Misc. Civil Appeal No.22/2019.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that he filed a regular suit for permanent injunction against the private respondents, who are the Gram Pradhan and his two brothers saying that the petitioner has a house situated in village Parsiya and his house is in two parts; one part of the house is used for residence and the remaining is used for Ghari, Bhusaila and Charani for cattle, where he has also installed his machinery. In between two parts of the residential houses and Bhusaila, there is a sahan land, which is also used as ingress and egress of tractor and trolley belonging to the petitioner. The sahan land is now being tried to be converted into public raasta by the respondent nos.3 to 5 due to panchayat election rivalry. The sahan land is marked as A, B, C and D in the map annexed with the plaint and that the respondents no.3 to 5 be restrained from using the sahan land as raasta and making it into the kharanja marg. On the case being registered and notice being issued, respondent nos.3 to 5 filed their objection to the application for temporary injunction, but in the meantime, the trial court had also passed an ex-parte interim order on the date of registration of the suit i.e. on 17.1.2017 that the parties shall maintain status quo over the land in question. After written statement and objections were filed, the petitioner filed his replication also. An Amin Commissioner was appointed by the learned trial court on 17.1.2017 on an application moved by the petitioner and the Amin Commissioner visited the land in question on 18.4.2017 and submitted his report. The petitioner filed his objection to the report of the Amin Commissioner. The learned trial court while deciding the application for temporary injunction Paper no.6A by the impugned order dated 18.9.2019, has rejected the petitioner's apprehension on the ground of failure to make out a prima facie case. The petitioner filed an appeal, which has also been rejected.