VEENA GURTOO Vs. RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioners against order dtd. 29/9/2016 (for short 'the impugned order') passed by learned City Judge, Jammu (for short 'the trial court') in case titled as "Rajesh Gupta Vs. Veena Gurtoo and another".

(2.) Facts giving rise to filing of the instant petition reveal that the plaintiff/respondent herein filed a civil suit for permanent prohibitory injunction along with an application for interim relief against the defendants/petitioners herein stating therein that he is owner in possession of House No. 127 situated at Lower Laxmi Nagar, Sarwal, Jammu having been purchased by him vide sale deed dtd. 9/3/2007 and that the boundary wall of the said house which is six feet in height separates the same from the house of the defendants/petitioners herein and that the said boundary wall as also the pillars of the main gate abutting the said boundary wall, due to heavy rains, got damaged requiring immediate repairs and in order to make necessary repairs in the said wall, he started making necessary repairs in the said wall to which the defendants/petitioners herein objected to and caused hurdles compelling the plaintiff/respondent herein to file the suit which after persuasion of the defendants/petitioners herein did not yield any results for not effecting repairs in the wall.

(3.) The trial Court, upon entertaining the suit on 22/9/2010, passed the interim order in the application for interim relief accompanying the suit restraining the defendants/petitioners herein from interfering in any manner in the repair of the boundary wall and the pillar of the main gate of the house of the plaintiff/respondent herein. It was further clarified that the plaintiff/respondent herein shall raise the construction in his own land i.e. well within the suit property and that too only on the foundation of the boundary wall which already existed on spot and upto the same height of which it existed earlier. The said order, however, was subject to objections from other side and notice was directed to be served upon the defendants/petitioners herein by the plaintiff/respondent herein in terms of the provisions of Rule 3 of the Order 39 CPC and the case came to be fixed for further proceedings on 29/9/2010.