SANJAY KUMAR Vs. SHAKTI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 14.11.2018 passed by learned Senior Civil Judge, Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh in CMA No Exe. No. 20 of 2015, whereby an application under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC, having been filed by the respondent-DH came to be allowed, petitioner-JD, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings with a prayer to set-aside the aforesaid impugned order.

(2.) Precisely, the facts of the case as emerge from the record are that the DH filed a Civil suit bearing No.109 of 2010 for permanent prohibitory injunction in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh, which came to be allowed vide judgment and decree dated 14.5.2012 (Annexure P-1). Vide aforesaid judgment and decree passed by learned court below, petitioner-JD came to be restrained from changing the nature of the suit land by raising construction, until the suit land is partitioned in the process of law by metes and bounds, but relief of mandatory injunction was declined.

(3.) It is not in dispute that aforesaid judgment and decree passed by learned Court below has attained finality because no appeal whatsoever came to be filed at the behest of the petitioner-JD. Since despite there being restraint order issued against the petitioner- JD, he attempted to change the nature of the suit land by raising construction, DH filed an application under Order XXI Rule 32 and Section 151 CPC for execution of injunction decree dated 14.5.2012 in the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge, Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh. DH averred in the application that JD on 16.5.2015 started digging the suit land with the JCB and also stacked building material with a view to raise construction over the suit land.