VIPIN KHANNA Vs. NARINDER KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is plaintiff in the trial Court. He claims himself to be the owner in possession of land entered in Khata No. 634 Khatauni No. 783-784 bearing Khasra Nos. 1286-1287 measuring 171 Square yards situate in Chamba town. Admittedly, there was a three storeyed building in existence over this land. The same allegedly gutted in the fire broken out during the night intervening 18th and 19th March, 2012. The respondent (defendant in the trial Court) allegedly was never inducted as tenant in the building in question and the entries in this regard in the revenue record are stated to be wrong and contrary to the factual position. As per further case of the petitioner, the Assistant Collector Ist Grade has no right to make such entries in the revenue record. He allegedly came to now about such entries in the revenue record in the month of April 2012 at a stage when the District Administration started distributing ex-gratia grant to the families effected in the incident of fire. The respondent allegedly claimed at that time that he has been inducted as tenant over a portion of the suit property. The petitioner also came forward with the version that the respondent is trying to raise construction forcibly over the suit property. The declaration that the petitioner is owner in possession of the suit land and the respondent was never inducted as tenant either by him or his predecessor-ininterest has been sought to be passed. Additionally, decree for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the respondent from causing interference in the peaceful possession of the petitioner over the suit land has also been sought.

(2.) An application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC registered as CMA No. 224 of 2013 has also been filed with a prayer that during the pendency of suit the respondent be restrained from causing interference in the suit property or causing interruption in the work of demolition of the burnt building, removal of debris or its reconstruction in any manner was also sought.

(3.) Learned trial Court on hearing the parties on both sides and taking into consideration the entire record has disposed of the application with a direction to the parties to maintain status quo qua the suit property during the pendency of the suit vide order dated. 4.1.2014.