STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs. UTTAM CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants/State have preferred this Misc. Appeal under Order 10LIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'the Code') against the order dated 6.8.1999 passed by District Judge, Shajapur in Civil Suit No. 17-A/99 by which the District Judge has granted mandatory injunction against the appellants by giving a direction that the possession over the disputed house alongwith articles be restored back to respondent No. 5 within a period of one month and thereafter the appellant State shall not interfere in the possession of the respondent No. 5 till the final disposal of the suit.

(2.) THE facts of the case, in brief, are that on 21.6.1999 respondents/plaintiffs filed a civil suit for declaration and injunction in the Court of District Judge, Shajapur with an application for temporary injunction making a prayer therein for issuance of temporary injunction against the appellants/defendants restraining them from interfering in the possession of the respondents/plaintiffs in respect of the suit house. The notices of the application for temporary injunction were issued urgently on the same day i.e. on 21.6.1999. The notices were served on the appellants through the Government Pleader on the same day i.e. on 21.6.1999 and the date of hearing was fixed on the next day i.e. 22.6.1999 looking to the urgency in the matter. The case of the respondents in the suit was that respondents No. 1 to 4 are the owners of the suit house as the house was inherited by them and a part of that house was given on rent to respondent No. 5. The suit-house is known as "Kabutar Khana". Earlier an Ayurvedic Hospital was being run in the suit house which according to respondents/plaintiffs was given on rent by respondents No. 1 to 4 to Shankarlal Vaidya and the department was paying rent. Subsequently the said Ayurvedic Hospital was shifted to other building constructed by the Government two years ago and respondents No. 1 to 4 got possession of the suit houses from Vaidya. The construction of this house is about 55 years old and the construction was done by the predecessors of respondents No. 1 to 4. As such on the date of the filing of the suit, the suit house was in possession of respondent No. 5 as a tenant of respondents No. 1 to 4.

(3.) THAT on 21.6.1999 Sub Divisional Officer passed an order of eviction against respondent No. 5 and directed the Tehsildar, Shajapur to evict respondent No. 5 and make compliance of his order. Immediately a letter was written by the Sub Divisional Officer, Shajapur to Tehsildar, Shajapur for taking possession and to submit the compliance report by tomorrow. On the same day i.e. on 21.6.1999 the Revenue Inspector went to village Dupada along with Patwari and the Police force. The locks were broken in presence of some persons, articles were removed and a Panchnama was prepared and after taking possession of all the rooms, the house was given in the custody of Up-Sarpanch Shri Bhagirath Rathore of Gram Panchayat. A Panchnama was also prepared. The Supurdginama was also prepared and the articles, which were removed from the said house, were given to one Smt. Gangabai w/o Laxminarayan Soni. By another Supurdginama, some other articles were given in the Supurdgi of Shri Manaklal. Yet another Supurdginama was prepared on the same day and the vacant house was given in the Supurdgi of Shri Bhagirath s/o Kaluram, Up-Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Dupada and a compliance report was also submitted by the Tehsildar, Tehsil Moman Barodiya, Shajapur on the same day before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Shajapur. The aforesaid compliance report was taken on record by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Shajapur and it was directed on the same day to produce the original copy of Panchnamas and Supurdginamas.