BANT SINGH Vs. LABH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has invoked supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside impugned order dated 03.11.2010, Annexure P6 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Patiala allowing the appeal filed by respondent-plaintiff against order dated 20.10.2009 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Patiala declining request of respondent-plaintiff for ad-interim injunction order. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including both the orders passed by learned courts below.

(2.) Brief facts relevant for the decision of present revision petition are that, respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of agreement to sell dated 01.10.2007 allegedly executed by petitioner defendant in his favour regarding the land in dispute. Alongwith the plaint, an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'the CPC) was filed seeking injunction against the present petitioner defendant.

(3.) On notice being issued, written statement as well as reply to the application was filed by petitioner-defendant taking the plea that possession of the land in dispute was handed over by the present petitioner-defendant to respondent-plaintiff at the time of execution of lease deed dated 27.06.2007, Ex.P1 for the period from 27.06.2007 to 20.10.2007 on Chakota for the said period and that he did not agree to sell the land in dispute to respondent plaintiff. Further plea is that after expiry of said period, possession was taken by the present petitioner-defendant and since then he is in cultivating possession of the same. He denied execution of the agreement to sell on which reliance has been placed by respondent-plaintiff. Learned trial Court vide order dated 20.10.2009 came to the conclusion that no prima facie case is made out in favour of respondent-plaintiff and balance of convenience also not in his favour and hence, the application of respondent-plaintiff for adinterim injunction order was dismissed. On appeal being filed by respondent plaintiff the said order was reversed and the application was allowed by learned Additional District Judge, Patiala.