RISHI Vs. PYARE RAM ALIAS PYARE LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner-Defendant (hereinafter referred to as defendant), being aggrieved with the order dated 28.8.2017, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Manali, District Kullu, in Civil Suit No. 119/2017, whereby, application filed by him under Section 151 CPC, for vacation of ex-parte injunction, came to be dismissed, has approached this Court by way of instant proceedings, praying therein to set aside the ex-parte stay, granted by the learned court below vide order dated 11.8.2017.

(2.) Facts as emerge from the record, are that the respondent-plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as plaintiff), filed a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction, restraining the defendant from changing the nature of the suit land by raising any sort of construction. Plaintiff also filed an application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC, restraining the defendant from raising construction over valuable portion of the suit land without getting the suit land partitioned. The learned court below, vide order dated 11th August, 2017, having taken note of averments contained in the application filed under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC, issued notice to the defendant, returnable for 17th August, 2017 and in the meantime, directed parties to maintain status quo qua nature and possession of the suit land till the next date of hearing. No doubt, the aforesaid order was subject to compliance of Order 39 Rule 3 CPC.

(3.) Subsequently, defendant moved an application under Section 151 CPC, on 26th August, 2017, praying therein to vacate the ad interim ex-parte order, directing therein parties to maintain status quo. Defendant alleged before the court below that since plaintiff failed to comply with the provision contained under Order 39 Rule 3 CPC, order dated 11.8.2017, deserves to be vacated.