RAT T I RAM Vs. GORDHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A suit instituted by Gordhan, plaintiff in the lower court and respondent herein, is pending adjudication before Civil Judge (Junior Division), Mahendergarh. Adjudication by the lower court vide order dated 10.1.2014 (Annexure P -5) as well as by the first appellate court vide order dated 16.7.2014 (Annexure P -6) regarding interim injunction vide application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC has been made in favour of the respondent -plaintiff. Despite that, the defendant, petitioner herein, allegedly continued interfering in the possession of the respondentplaintiff resulting in moving of an application by the respondent -plaintiff for police help for protection and implementation of the orders of the two courts below. This application was allowed by the lower court vide impugned order dated 15.12.2014 (Annexure P -7).

(2.) ALLEGED defiance of the petitioner -defendant is sought to be checked and the respondent -plaintiff has sought protection against his dispossession at the hands of the petitioner -defendant by way of police help. There is a concurrent finding of fact recorded against the petitionerdefendant that neither he has got prima - facie case nor balance of convenience is in his favour as he is not in possession of the suit land. In such a situation, when the petitioner -defendant is not making compliance with the orders in favour of the respondent -plaintiff, impugned order by the lower court giving police help to the respondent -plaintiff is in tune with the tenor and temperament of the litigation and the orders passed in favour of the respondent -plaintiff during proceedings of the same.

(3.) ORDERS dated 10.1.2014 (Annexure P -5) and 16.7.2014 (Annexure P -6) passed by the lower court as also the first appellate court respectively which have gone against the petitioner -defendant have not even been challenged in the present revision petition. These orders are being implemented vide the impugned order dated 15.12.2014 (Annexure P -7).