BIKAS GHOSH Vs. DAYAL CHANDRA GHOSH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An order dtd. 12/6/2019 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), 1st Court at Purba Burdwan in Title Suit No. 95 of 2014 rejecting an application under Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by the plaintiffs/petitioners praying for police help to implement an order of temporary injunction is assailed in the instant revision invoking Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) It is on record that the plaintiffs/petitioners filed Title Suit No. 95 of 2014 for declaration of title over the suit property and permanent injunction against the defendants stating, inter alia, that they are in possession of the suit property by way of inheritance. The record of rights, both R.S. and L.R. stand in their names. They are possessing the suit property by cultivation but the defendants are trying to disturb their possession claiming the suit property as debottar property.

(3.) In the said suit the petitioners filed an application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying for temporary injunction till the disposal of the suit. The learned Trial Judge in his order dtd. 12/8/2015 came to the prima facie finding that the plaintiffs are in possession of the suit property, the record of rights are in the name of the plaintiffs, title deed stands in their name and, therefore, an order of temporary injunction was passed directing the defendants not to change the nature and character of the suit property till the disposal of the suit. The defendants preferred a Misc. Appeal against the said order of injunction which was eventually dismissed on contest. Subsequently, the petitioners filed an application under Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying for police help to implement the order of injunction alleging, inter alia, that the defendants are disturbing peaceful possession of the plaintiffs violating the order of injunction. The learned Trial Judge rejected the said application vide order dtd. 12/6/2019 holding, inter alia, that the plaintiffs did not pray for local inspection over the suit property to show the alleged violation and bring the present picture of the suit property before the Trial Court.