MAHENDRA KUMAR JAIN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed for necessary directions to the Sub Divisional Officer Bamanwas for compliance of the ad-interim order dated 19-1-2012 in suit No.9/2012.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners submits that on a suit laid by the as plaintiffs vide order dated 19-1-2012, the Sub Divisional Officer, Bamanwas in suit No.9/2012 issued an ad-interim direction that the defendant-respondent Roop Chand be injuncted from making any construction over a land 0.15 hectare in Khasra No.6387 situated in Bamanwas and further not to change the nature of agricultural land or interfere with the cultivatory possession of the petitioners. Learned counsel submits that the order dated 19-1-2012 has neither been vacated nor modified nor set aside. He submits that yet, inspite of the aforesaid order, the respondent Roop Chand continues to unlawfully encroach upon the petitioners' land 0.15 hectare of khasra No.6387 and raise construction thereon.

(3.) HAVING heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record of the writ petition, I would dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the Sub Divisional Officer Bamanwas to expeditiously dispose of the petitioners' application under Order 39 Rule 2 A CPC, and no event in a period beyond two months from the date of the receipt of certified copy of this order. The petitioners as plaintiffs in the suit would also be free to move an application under Section 151 CPC seeking a mandatory injunction on the ground of the defendant in the suit having encroached (as alleged subject to evidence) upon the petitioners-plaintiffs' land subsequent to the interim order dated 19-1-2012.