RAM CHANDER Vs. HARBHAJAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition directed against the order of the Additional District Judge, Karnal, dated September 11, 1985, whereby the order of the trial Court directing status quo regarding possession to be maintained by the parties till the decision of the suit was set aside and the plaintiffs were restrained from dispossessing the defendant Harbhajan Singh from the disputed property otherwise than in due course of law.

(2.) The plaintiffs-petitioners filed the suit for declaration and possession. In the suit, the defendant moved an application for the grant of a temporary injunction restraining the plaintiffs from taking forcible possession of the land, in dispute, from him except in due course of law. That application was contested on behalf of the plaintiff inter alia on the ground that no such application was maintainable. However, the learned trial Court disposed of the same with the order that status quo regarding possession be maintained by the parties till the decision of the suit. However, defendant Harbhajan Singh feeling aggrieved against the said order filed an appeal before the Additional District Judge. The learned Addl. District Judge set aside the said order of the trial Court and directed that the plaintiffs were restrained from dispossessing the defendant from the disputed property otherwise than in due course of law. Aggrieved against the same, the plaintiffs have filed this revision petition in this Court.

(3.) The revision petition was admitted and it was contended at the time of the motion hearing that the relief under Order 39 rule 1(c) of the Code of the Civil Procedure, (hereinafter called the Code), could not be granted to the defendant. At the same time, status quo was ordered to be maintained till further orders.