HARPHOOL SINGH Vs. JAI BHAGWAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HARPHOOL Singh defendant no. 1 has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning judgment dated 1.3.2012 passed by learned District Judge, Kaithal. Respondent no. 1 ? plaintiff Jai Bhagwan has filed suit against defendant no. 1 ? petitioner and proforma respondents no. 2 to 4 as defendants no. 2 to 4 alleging that plaintiff purchased the suit land from its owners Chuhru (father of defendants), Baru, Telu defendant no. 2, HARPHOOL defendant no. 1 and Ami Pal defendant no. 3 vide registered sale deed dated 26.3.1973 and since then plaintiff is owner in possession of the suit land.

(2.) HOWEVER, transaction of sale has not been incorporated in the revenue record. Baru one of the vendors has expired issueless and defendants being sons and daughter of brother of Baru have inherited his share. On the basis of wrong revenue entries, the defendants threatened to dispossess the plaintiff from the suit land. Plaintiff sought permanent injunction restraining defendants from doing so. Temporary injunction to the same effect during the pendency of the suit was claimed by moving separate application for the purpose.

(3.) LEARNED Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kaithal vide order dated 2.6.2011, Annexure P/1 dismissed the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction. However, appeal against the same preferred by plaintiff has been allowed by learned District Judge, Kaithal vide impugned judgment dated 1.3.2012, Annexure P/3 and thereby defendants have been restrained from dispossessing the plaintiff from the suit land forcibly and illegally except in due course of law. Feeling aggrieved, defendant no. 1 has filed this revision petition.