BARU RAM Vs. GRAM PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the judgment dated September 22, 1986 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur, whereby he accepted the appeal of Gram Panchayat of village Dallewal, District Hoshiarpur, respondent No. 1, arising from the order of the trial Court dated 4.2.1986. The learned trial Court had held that there was no prima facie case in favour of the plaintiff-respondent No. 1 and the ex parte injunction granted in its favour was vacated. The learned Additional District Judge, allowed the appeal of respondent No. 1 and granted the prayer made in the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code (for short 'the Code') filed along with the suit and by issuing a temporary injunction restrained the petitioner from cutting the Khair trees in question and further restrained defendant-respondent No. 2 from allowing the petitioner from cutting/removing them. The said ad interim injunction was made operative till the decision of the suit by the trial Court. The petitioner being aggrieved against the same has filed the present revision petition.

(2.) The facts in brief are that respondent No. 1 owned Khair trees standing/growing in the Shamilat land. On May 5, 1977, its Sarpanch auctioned those trees. The petitioner gave the highest bid at the rate of Rs. 15.60 per sq. feet which was accepted. Respondent No. 1 submitted the case of auction sale of the threes in favour of the petitioner to the Collector who vide his order dated March 1, 1978 cancelled the auction in favour of the petitioner. Thereafter, on April 15, 1982, respondent No. 2 re-auctioned the trees and sold the same in favour of one Jagat Ram who gave the highest bid at the rate of Rs. 52/- per sq. feet, which bid was accepted. The petitioner thereon filed suit in the Civil Court on April 30, 1982 and arrayed respondent No. 1 and the subsequent auction-purchaser Jagat Ram as defendants. An objection was raised by respondent No. 1 that Civil Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit. A specific issue on this point was struck by the learned Additional Senior Subordinate Judge, Hoshiarpur, who tried the suit. He decided the issue of jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner holding that the Civil Court had the jurisdiction and then on merits held that the petitioner was the owner of Khair trees by virtue of the auction thereof in his favour on May 5, 1977. A decree dated September 7, 1984 was accordingly passed in favour of the petitioner. No appeal against the same was preferred by respondent No. 1 or by Jagat Ram.

(3.) Respondent No. 1 then filed the instant suit for declaration to the effect that the judgment and decree dated 7.9.1984 passed by the Additional Senior Subordinate Judge, in favour of the petitioner declaring that he is the owner of the Khair trees. It also filed an application for grant of ad interim injunction which as already mentioned above was dismissed by the trial Court. Its appeal before the Additional District Judge, however, succeeded and was allowed vide impugned order.