SHARANJIT SINGH Vs. RAGHU NATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this judgment two revision petitions bearing C.R. No.1186 of 2013 and C.R. No.1194 of 2013 shall be disposed of.

(2.) Plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for possession of the plot in dispute as well as for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from raising any type of construction over the said plot. An application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC was also filed for interim injunction before the trial Court and the trial Court finding disputed question of fact of possession and ordered status quo. An appeal was filed by the present petitioner against the order dated 07.03.2011 passed by Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Patiala and the same was dismissed by Additional District Judge, Patiala vide order dated 03.12.2012.

(3.) Petitioner-defendant has approached this Court by way of filing present revision petition to challenge order dated 03.12.2012 passed by Additional District Judge, Patiala on the ground that petitioner is in possession of the suit property and the sale deed in favour of respondent was sham transactions just to defeat the right of the petitioner. Respondent never remained in possession as owner of the property and he was attorney of Gurdial Singh, who earlier filed a suit for injunction against Narinderpal Singh, Surjit Kaur and one more but the interim application filed in that suit was declined. The First Appellate Court dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner by recording a wrong finding as prima-facie case is in favour of the petitioner and balance of convenience is also in his favour as is clear from finding recorded by the trial Court. The First Appellate Court has reversed the finding recorded by the trial Court without recording any finding as to how the findings recorded by the trial Court are perverse.