VIR SINGH Vs. GRAM PANCHAYAT VILLAGE DABKHERI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the respondent-Gram Panchayat from proceeding with the application filed under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act for his ejectment. The ground stated is that the earlier petition filed by the Panchayat was dismissed for default. Along with the suit, he filed an application for ad interim injunction to the effect that the Panchayat may be restrained from proceeding with that application and interfering in the possession of the former. Ad interim injunction was allowed qua possession and no order was passed by the trial Court regarding the second relief. The petitioner, therefore, went in appeal before the learned District Judge, Kurukshetra, who again in the impugned order passed, did not grant him the required relief. Aggrieved thereby, he has come up in this Revision.

(2.) For his contention that the second application would be barred, the learned counsel has relied upon a decision of J.V. Gupta, J. in Inder Singh v. Gram Panchayat of village Achal, Nabha, 1986 89 PunLR 379 but that decision has no bearing on the present case. There, the application filed under Section 7 by the Gram Panchayat had been decided on merits and it was held that the second application would be barred by the principle of res judicata. In the present case, the application was dismissed for default. As there is no provision equivalent to the provisions of Order 9 Rule 9, a second application would not be barred. The principle or res judicata can be invoked only if a decision on merits has been made and not otherwise. The suit therefore, raises no prima facie triable issue and this petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs.