Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 995 (PNJ)

Gram Panchayat, Bhora Kalan v. Kesar Devi

2000-08-25

R.L.ANAND

body2000
ORDER R.L. Anand, J. - By this order I dispose of two Civil Revisions No. 1613 and 2041, both of 2000, as both the revisions have arisen from one order dated 29.1.2000, passed by the Court of Addl. Distt. Judge, Gurgaon, who set aside the order dated 21.9.1999, passed by the Court of Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Gurgaon, who dismissed the application of the plaintiff-Kesar Devi under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, CPC. 2. The suit was instituted by Kesar Devi d/o Mool Chand against the Gram Panchayat, Bhora Kalan, Executive Engineer, Haryana Vidyut Parsaran Nigam, Mahrauli Road, Gurgaon and S.D.O., Sub Division, Bhora Kalan, and others and she claimed that she is in joint possession of the land in dispute with the respondents 1 to 7. 3. The suit was contested by the Gram Panchayat as well as the Executive Engineer and their joint stand is that Kesar Devi has no right, title or interest in the suit land. The land belongs to the Gram Panchayat which has been validly given to the Board in order to install a 66 KVA Sub Station. The learned trial Court dismissed the application of the plaintiff-Kesar Devi under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, CPC, by holding that she has failed to prove prima facie her right with regard to the said property. Aggrieved by the order dated 21.9.1999, Kesar Devi filed an appeal in the Court of the Addl. Distt. Judge, Gurgaon, who vide the impugned order dated 29.1.2000 allowed the appeal, reversed the order of the trial Court and defendants 1 to 3 were restrained from constructing power house or raise any sort of construction over the suit land and also from dispossessing the plaintiff therefrom in any manner, except in due course of law. 4. In this manner, the Gram Panchayat and the Executive Engineer have filed the present revisions. 5. I have heard the counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the record of this case. 6. During the course of submissions, Mr. C.B. Goel, has shown to me some photographs which, prima facie, establish that the Board has constructed the building and the machinery has also been dumped outside the building for installation of 66 KVA Sub Station. 7. 6. During the course of submissions, Mr. C.B. Goel, has shown to me some photographs which, prima facie, establish that the Board has constructed the building and the machinery has also been dumped outside the building for installation of 66 KVA Sub Station. 7. On the contrary, counsel for Kesar Devi submitted that the building might have been raised after the passing of the impugned order dated 29.1.2000. According to the counsel, Kesar Devi-plaintiff is in possession of the property and it is yet to be adjudicated by the trial Court whether she is occupying this property in her right or whether this property belongs to the Gram Panchayat, Bhora Kalan, and it will also been seen by trial Court whether the Gram Panchayat was in possession of the property and whether the possession has been validly transferred to the Executive Engineer or not. 8. In view of the conflicting stands of the parties with regard to possession, it will be appropriate for me and in the interest of justice of both the parties if the order dated 29.1.2000 is modified. Accordingly, the parties are directed to maintain status quo as it exists today on the disputed land. Any construction raised by the Board shall be at its own risk and responsibility. The Board is also not even restrained from installing the 66 KVA Sub-Station but ultimately, if it is found that Kesar Devi is entitled to the possession of the property, the building and the machinery shall be removed by the Board at its own risk and responsibility. Copy dasti on payment. Order accordingly.