UMEDA RAM Vs. RAM CHANDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the order dt. 11.09.2008 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No. 2, Bikaner (for short 'the appellate Court' hereinafter) in an appeal, whereby the appellate Court has confirmed the order dt. 02.07.2003 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Nokha (for short 'the trial Court' hereinafter), whereby the learned trial Court, while disposing of the application under Order 39 Rule 2A read with Section 151 C.P.C., has sentenced the petitioner for one month's civil imprisonment, holding him guilty for committing the contempt of Court. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent had moved an application under Order 39 Rule 2A read with Section 151 C.P.C., while alleging that on 28.02.1997, on an application for granting temporary injunction, the trial Court had restrained the petitioner and two others viz. Ganga and Tulchhi from interfering with the possession of the respondent in respect of a house, but on 22.03.1997, the petitioner Umeda Ram and others had forcibly taken over the possession of his house in violation of the restrained order passed by the trial Court. The said application preferred by the respondent came to be allowed by the learned trial Court vide order dt. 12.07.2003 and after concluding that the petitioner is guilty of committing the contempt of Court, sentenced him for one month's civil imprisonment.

(2.) THE petitioner had challenged the order dt. 12.07.2003 by way of filing an appeal before the learned appellate Court, however, the said appeal came to be dismissed vide order dt. 11.09.2008, which is under challenge in this writ petition.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the respondent has also admitted that the possession of the property in question has been handed over to the respondent and the respondent is in possession of the property in question.