OM PRAKASH Vs. KUNWAR PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHISHIR Kumar, J. By means of the present writ petition the petitioners have approached this Court for issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari quash ing the order dated 29-4-2004 (Annexure 6 to the writ petition ).

(2.) THE facts arising out of the present writ petition are that the petitioners' father purchased house property from one Sri Khacheru Mai and Lalji, both sons of Sri Gopal through a registered sale-deed and since then they are enjoying their possession over the aforesaid house property con tinuously as owners of the said house. At the time of purchase of the house there was only one kachcha kotha con structed and later on the father of the petitioners got constructed two rooms and a verandah after demolishing the kachcha kotha, leaving some land vacant as an open area. When the defendant-respondent No. 1 without having any right threatened of raise il legal construction over the vacant land of the petitioners with the help of police administration, the petitioners' father had filed a Suit No. 377 of 1 992, Sri Voda Ram v. Kunwar Pal, in the Court of Munsif Hawaii, Aligarh, seeking perpetual in junction with the following reliefs: Reliefs: " (a) That by passing a decree of man datory injunction favour of plaintiff and against the defendant, the defendant be directed to restraining his construction by the suit with in the time as fixed by this Hon'ble Court on his failure the same be done through Court of agency be done. (b) Cost of the suit be awarded to the plaintiff and against the defendant. (c) Any other relief which the Court may deem fit under the circumstance on the also given plaintiff and against the defendant. "

(3.) THE Trial Court after considering the fact and after hearing both the par ties was pleased to allow the applica tion vide its judgment and order dated 9-8-2002 and the order dated 5-5-1998 has been recalled. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, a revision was filed by the Despondent No. 1 and the revisional Court vide its order dated 29-4-2004 was pleased to allow the revision and set aside the order passed by the Trial Court restoring the suit for decision on merits. THE petitioner aggrieved by the order dated 29-4-2004 has approached this Court.