SUBASH SINGH Vs. KARNAIL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been preferred against the order dated 06.11.2015 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Mukerian, vide which the application moved by the petitioner-plaintiff under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short the "CPC") has been dismissed and the order dated 17.05.2016 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur vide which the appeal filed by the petitioner-plaintiff against the aforesaid order has also been dismissed.

(2.) The petitioner-plaintiff filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining the respondent-defendant from blocking the passage over land measuring 18 Marla comprised in Khewat No.170/154, Khatoni No.193, Khasra No.45/3 (0-18) being part of Khewat No.183, Khatoni No.239, Khasra No.45 (13-14) situated in village Salehrian Kalan, H.B. No.313 Tehsil Mukerian, Distt. Hoshiarpur. As per the case of the petitioner-plaintiff the land comprised in Khasra No.45 measuring 13 Kanal 14 Marla was reserved as common passage for the people of the village during consolidation proceedings. Since then the plaintiff being permanent resident along with other people of the village has been using the said property as common passage. The respondent-defendant has no exclusive right or title in the suit property but he in connivance with the revenue and consolidation authorities illegally and fraudulently got the suit property entered in his name without following the legal procedure. The revenue entries showing the ownership and possession of the respondent-defendant and his brother qua Khasra No.45/3 are illegal, null and void and are liable to be corrected. The respondent-defendant being Lambardar as well as Sarpanch of the village colluded with the consolidation authorities and got the alleged order dated 31.08.1992 from the Additional Consolidation Director and later on an order dated 30.10.1994 from AC IInd Grade, Mukerian, which are null and void. Otherwise also, the aforesaid order was never executed and no physical possession was even exchanged. It is further pleaded that now on the basis of the wrong revenue entries, the defendant is threatening to block the passage comprised on Khasra No.45/3 which is part of original Khasra No.45 (13-14) by raising the construction. Hence, the suit.

(3.) Along with the suit, the petitioner-plaintiff also filed an application for ad interim injunction on the same lines.