BHEEM SAIN Vs. ARJUN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE learned Trial Court negatived the plaintiff-respondent's plea for the restraint of defendants-respondents from demolishing a part of his house which allegedly obstructed the passage. It was held by the learned Trial Court that "the defendants are only trying to vacate the encroached portion of the passage leading to their land."

(2.) IN appeal, however, the learned Additional District Judge reversed the finding and ordered the restraint of defendants-petitioners "from demolishing any part of the house of the plaintiff/appellant on the basis of the order dated 24.3.2006 passed by the SDM, Abohar forcibly and illegally, except in due course of law."

(3.) IF the plaintiff-respondent has a grievance qua the validity of the impugned order (on an averment that provision of Section 133 Cr.P.C. had not been complied with), he may take recourse to the remedy available to him in the form of an appeal or revision. Sub Section 2 of Section 133 Cr.P.C. prima-facie appear to the filing of a suit to challenge of an order of that category. If the affected party has a grievance with regard to the validity of an order under Section 133 Cr.P.C., the challenge thereto has to be filed before the competent Court of law on the appellate or revisional side by that party. That party cannot validly file a civil suit against the order passed by the S.D.M. in the proceedings under Section 133 Cr.P.C.