Short Note : Non-applicants 1 to 7 filed a suit against the applicant and non-applicants 8 and 9 for an order of perpetual injunction to restrain the defendants from carrying on any work of construction of a public way in the Village Sheshpur, Tahsil Manasa. The plaintiffs have alleged that by the side of the houses owned by the defendants which open on the public way, they have made certain encroachments and on the encroached portion of the public way, they have also raised certain construction. These encroachments, according to the plaintiffs caused obstruction on the public passage and the defendants were, therefore, liable to vacate those encroachments. The plaintiffs also made an application under Order 39, rules 1 and 2 Civil Procedure Code to restrain the defendants from making any further construction on the encroached portion of the public way. While this application was pending in the trial Court, the defendents gave an undertaking that in case the plaintiffs ultimately succeed in establishing the encroachment, they will remove the encroachment even if the demolition of the construction made on the passage is involved. In the light of this undertaking the ad interim order passed earlier by the trial Court was discharged and the defendants were permitted to proceed with the construction work on the portion allegedly encroached upon by them. Feeling dissatisfied with this order, the plain tiffs filed an appeal which has been allowed by the impugned order. 2. Held: Documents have been filed by the plaintiff to show that steps were taken by the village Panchayat and the encroachment alleged against the defendants was got vacated prior to the institution of the suit. Even thereafter the defendants, according to the plaintiffs, have encroched upon the public way and put up their own construction with a view to obstruct the passage which not only the plaintiffs but the village people are also entitled to use. The main dispute between the parties in these circumstances is about the alleged encroachment made by the defendants. However, on a prima facie basis, the learned lower appellate Court has found that a case of encroachment is made out no doubt while the ad interim order of injunction was in force the defendants will not be permitted to raise any further construction on the disputed portion. However, on a prima facie basis, the learned lower appellate Court has found that a case of encroachment is made out no doubt while the ad interim order of injunction was in force the defendants will not be permitted to raise any further construction on the disputed portion. But looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it would not be just or proper to permit the defendants to raise any further construction on the disputed land which is said to be a part of public way in the-village. 3. The fact that the defendants have given an undertaking to demolish the entire construction and to be made by them in case the plaintiffs ultimately succeed cannot, in my opinion be a ground for permitting them to resume the construction work till the decision of this suit. Once it is prima facie established that there is an encroachment on the public way, it would be unreasonable to permit the defendants to perpetuate the prima facie encroachment till the suit is decided. As already stated above, the allegations against the defendants is that even after the village Panchayat had got the encroachment vacated, the encroachment was made again by the defendants. In the light of these facts which prima facie appear from the material on record the order passed by the Court below cannot be said to be unjustified. 4. Revision dismissed.