NANAK CHAND Vs. VINOD THAKUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present civil revision petition has been filed by petitioner/ plaintiff No.1 against the order dtd. 25/7/2023 (Annexure P-2) passed by Civil Judge (Jr.Divn.), Gurugram whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC was dismissed and order dtd. 10/8/2023 (Annexure P-1) whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order Annexure P-2 has been dismissed with prayer to stay the respondents from raising construction over the suit land and restraining them from alienating specific portion of the same and to stay the operation of sanad taqseem dtd. 8/2/2023 (Annexure P-10)

(2.) The brief facts of the case of the petitioner are that the plaintiffs along with defendants No.1 to 8 and defendants No.10 to 28 are co-owners in joint possession of the suit land measuring 09 kanals 10 marlas and 30 kanals 03 marlas, which is fully detailed in paras No.1 and 2 of plaint. The suit property is gair mumkin. The revenue authorities passed order of partition and also prepared sanad taqseem (Annexure P-10) with regard to entire joint property (gair mumkin). The revenue officials were having no jurisdiction to deal with the suit property as the land in question is not being used for agricultural purposes and residential houses are existing at the spot. The respondents are having no right to raise construction therein and they have also got no right to alienate the suit property beyond their shares. The challenge has been laid to the partition proceedings conducted by the revenue authorities even on the ground that the said proceedings were conducted by the revenue officials in violation of the principles of natural justice as no notice of the said proceedings was ever issued to the plaintiffs. That even otherwise, the alleged partition is bad being partial partition. Along with the suit, the plaintiffs also filed an injunction application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC.

(3.) The suit as well as the injunction application is contested by the respondents, who filed written statement and written reply. The respondents, while supporting the partition proceedings conducted by the revenue authorities, pleaded that there is no illegality or infirmity in the same and that the said proceedings were carried out by the revenue authorities in accordance with law.