RADHA DEVI Vs. NIRMAL KOCHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner Smt. Radha Devi, defendant before the trial Court, has assailed the order dated 19.9.2013 passed by learned District Judge, Solan, H.P. in Civil Misc. Appeal No. 17-S/14 of 2013, titled as Smt. Radha Devi vs. Smt. Nirmal Kochhar & others, affirming the order dated 1.7.2013 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Arki, District Solan, H.P., in C.M.A. No. 184/6 of 2012, titled as Nirmal Kochher vs. Giri Raj & others. Trial Court, in an application filed by plaintiff Smt. Nirmal Kochher (respondent herein), under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC, directed as under:

(2.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties, as also perused the record, I am of the considered view that no ground for interference is made out in the present petition. Courts below have recorded their satisfaction with regard to the plaintiff's case. Settled principles of law, for grant of interim injunction stand considered and applied. Balance of convenience, prima facie strong case and irreparable loss and injury, which cannot be compensated in terms of money, are factors which have weighed in favour of the plaintiff. Plaintiff is an old lady, aged 70 years. Her apprehension of encroachment of her land on the hands of defendant cannot be said to be unfounded. As such, her possession needs to be protected till such time, rights of the parties, based on their pleadings, are adjudicated by the trial Court.

(3.) In support of the petitioner's case learned counsel has referred to and relied upon the decision rendered by the apex Court in State of U.P. & others vs. Ram Sukhi Devi, 2005 9 SCC 733. I am afraid the ratio laid down is totally inapplicable to the given facts. The Court was dealing with a case where in a writ petition, interim directions were issued which in effect amounted to allowing the petition itself, without adjudication of the respective rights, controversies and issues involved.