PURSHOTAM KUMAR Vs. KUSUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, the petitioner challenges the orders of the learned Courts below by which he has been ordered to undergo simple civil imprisonment for a period of 14 days on account of the fact that despite an order having been passed in the civil suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff, in which the petitioner is the first defendant, to the effect that status quo would be maintained by the parties qua the suit land consisting of 61 bighas 7 biswas, the petitioner was found to have sold land to the extent of 100 sq. yards therefrom.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as a matter of fact the aforesaid order was passed when the application filed by the petitioner under Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC was still pending, though on specific query, he could not deny that the said order was passed in the presence of his counsel which is also obvious from a perusal of the copy of the order (Annexure P-4 with the petition), wherein Shri S.L.Nirwania, Advocate, is shown to be present for the petitioner, i.e. respondent no.1 in the application under Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC.

(3.) Learned counsel for respondent no.1 on the other hand submits that even though it is not denied that the area of land sold is only a 100 sq. yards, and admittedly the respondent plaintiff has sought a 1/6th share of 61 bhighas and 7 biswas of land, which would amount to slightly over 10 bhighas of land, even so, the petitioner having deliberately flouted the order of the trial Court by which status quo was to be maintained, he does not deserve any leniency.