(1.) HEARD .
(2.) THIS revision petition has been preferred against the concurrent findings of both the courts below regarding prayer for injunction made from the side of the petitioner in Title Suit no. 32 of 1997.
(3.) IT does not appear from the orders passed by both the courts below as to whether there was any initiation of encroachment proceeding under the Act and the petitioner has filed an affidavit to the effect that up -till -now to his knowledge no such encroachment proceeding has been initiated by the opposite party. In that view of the matter, when the opposite parties have not initiated an encroachment proceeding up -till -now, the appreciation (sic?"apprehension ?) in the mind of the petitioner can be set at rest only with this observation and direction that the petitioner should not be dispossessed by the opposite parties during the pendency of the suit forcefully but they shall be at liberty to proceed legally as per the Act itself. In that way, the petitioner shall get opportunity to raise his case.