OM PARKASH Vs. NIRMALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been directed against an order dated 10/10/2000 passed by the Additional District Judge, Karnal whereby he accepted an appeal against the order passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Karnal vide which an application under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC moved by the respondent-plaintiffs was declined. Vide the aforesaid impugned order, the learned Additional District Judge restrained the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner, along with his co-defendants, from dispossessing the respondent-plaintiffs from the land in dispute.

(2.) On September 3, 2001, while issuing notice of motion and after taking notice of the contention that the petitioner is in possession of the suit property and his possession is reflected in the revenue record, this Court directed that status quo regarding possession as it existed on that day, be maintained.

(3.) It appears from the record that the service is complete. Civil Revision No.1819 of 2001 -: 2 :- However, on 9/10/2003, none appeared on behalf of the parties and the case was adjourned sine-die. Thereafter, it has been taken up for final disposal. Since the order to maintain status quo as it existed on September 03, 2001 was passed by this Court about five years back, there is every likelihood that during the interregnum, the main suit itself has been decided.