RAMJI DASS Vs. KRISHAN LAL AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-plaintiff though succeeded in the trial Court to obtain an interim order under Order 39, rules 1 and 2, Civil Procedure Code, restraining the respondents from interfering in his physical possession of the suit land, yet has been dis-entitled to the same by the lower Appellate Court. Having perused the order of the Appellate Court I find that it has taken pains to record the sweeping conclusions i.e. jamabandi entries for the years 1975-76, 1980-81, 1985-86 and khasra girdawari for Rabi 1990 which support the stand of the plaintiff do not depict the correct position and "these entries in the revenue record are false creation of said Om Parkash in conspiracy with unscrupulous revenue officials". Again, the Court chose to ignore the decree dated 2nd Nov., 1989 which, too, lends support to the claim of the plaintiff-petitioner with the observation that the same was not founded on a genuine transaction and, therefore, Naresh Dass is not the owner of the suit land even prima facie. I am of the view that at this stage the Court need not have gone into these details and more particularly when it had to discard the revenue entries which carry presumption of truth though rebatable and the decree passed by a competent Court. All these matters are to be examined in depth towards the conclusion of the trial. Therefore, I set aside impugned order of the lower Appellate Court and restrain the respondent-defendants from interfering in the possession of the plaintiff on the suit land till the disposal of the suit. Ordered accordingly