JAI NARAIN Vs. RAM KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order of the Additional District Judge, Bhiwani dated May 5, 1989, whereby the order of the trial Court dated November 5, 1988, restraining the defendants from interfering into the peaceful possession of the plaintiff over the rurisin dispute except in due course of law, was maintained.

(2.) The plaintiff Ram Kumar son of Shiv Charan filed this suit for permanent injunction alleging that he, along with his brother and sister, is in possession of the said site in dispute as tenants and in the revenue records they have been recorded as "Mujara Gair Mourusi Batshwar Malkiat Khud". The defendants controverted the said allegation and asserted that they are in possession. The application filed by the defendants for the appointment of the Local Commissioner was declined. However, the trial Court on the basis of the entries in the revenue record found that since the plaintiff is in possession of the site in dispute, he is entitled to the said ad interim injunction prayed for. In appeal, the said order was maintained. Ordinarily this Court does not interfere in the discretion exercised by the two Courts below in such like matters. However, the learned counsel for the petitioners pointed out that it is a second round of litigation. Earlier, the father of the plaintiff Shiv Charan, filed suit which was dismissed upto this Court and now his son has filed the present suit. It appears that these facts were never brought to the notice of the Courts below nor there is any such mention.

(3.) According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, all these facts were in the knowledge of the plaintiff, but he intentionally suppressed the material facts and circumstances of the case, he is not entitled to any ad interim injunction particularly when defendants are admittedly the owners of the site in dispute.