SHEOJI Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has beseeched to quash and set-aside the orders dated 4th February, 2012 and 6th January, 2011 passed by learned District Judge, Sawai Madhopur and Civil Judge (Jr.Div.), Sawai Madhopur, respectively.

(2.) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused the relevant material on record including the impugned orders, it is noticed that a suit came to be filed by the plaintiff-respondent no.3 for permanent injunction against the defendant-petitioner together with an application for temporary injunction before the learned trial court. The learned trial court, having analyzed the matter ad-longum allowed the application for temporary injunction vide order dated 6th January, 2011 and restrained the defendant-petitioner to raise construction and interfere with the suit property and directed him to close the tank and remove the Chabutri constructed on the disputed property. Aggrieved with the order dated 6th January, 2011, the defendant - petitioner preferred an appeal before the District Judge, Sawai Madhopur. The learned appellate court, vide its order dated 4th February, 2012, dismissed the appeal of the defendant-petitioner and affirmed the order of the trial court. Thus, there has been a concurrent finding of fact of both the courts below.

(3.) IN this case, the Hon'ble Apex Court observed that the High Court had no jurisdiction after reversing the concurrent findings of fact of the courts below and remand the case to the Additional Judicial Commissioner.