MALKIT SINGH Vs. BACHITTAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been directed against the order dated 29.4.1997 passed by the Civil Judge, Junior division, Faridkot. By this order, the learned Civil Judge has directed that the issue with regard to the jurisdiction of the civil Court should be treated as preliminary issue. Notice of this petition was issued to the respondents.

(2.) MR . Sidhu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that in the present case witnesses to be examined on both the sides would be hardly 3 or 4 and evidence on all issues can be completed within a short period. He further submits that since the issue involves evidence also, the learned Trial Court was not correct in treating the issue as preliminary issue. In support of his submission, he has placed reliance on judgment of Gujarat High Court in Kaushiklal Nana Lal Parikh v. Mafatlal Industries Ltd., AIR 1995 Gujarat 115.

(3.) AFTER hearing the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court, I do not find any infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the learned trial Court. In the present case, the plaintiff-petitioner has filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from using Khal Moga No. 14577/Right, Matta Minor situated in the area of Village Ajit Gill, District Faridkot. From the title of the suit itself it appears that the suit pertains to the provisions of the Act and to decide whether the suit is mainainable or not, no evidence is required, as according to the defendant-respondents, the fact as stated in the plaint can be treated as correct for the purpose of deciding this issue. Accordingly, I do not find any merit in this petition. The view I have taken finds support from the judgment of this Court in case Gulzar Singh (supra). The case of K.N. Parikh (supra) relied upon by the learned counsel of the petitioner, is of no assistance to the petitioner as in that case, issue could not be decided without evidence whereas in the present case, as stated herein above, no evidence is required. Accordingly the petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed.