Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 307 (JK)

Daljit Singh v. Gurnaam Singh

2020-07-13

SANJEEV KUMAR

body2020
JUDGMENT : The petitioner-plaintiff has filed a suit for declaration that the agreement to sell dated 03.05.1989 executed by him in favour of respondent No.1-defendant with respect to the land measuring 18 marlas falling under khasra No. 98(old)/263 (new) situated at village Kotli Arjun Singh, R.S.Pura is null and void and inoperative qua him. The petitioner-plaintiff has also sought a consequential relief of injunction restraining the respondents from interfering, in any manner, in the peaceful possession of the plaintiff over the suit land. 2. The learned City Judge, Jammu (hereafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’), at the time of entertaining the suit and issuing summons to the respondents, by way of interim relief, directed the parties to maintain status quo respect to the subject matter of suit. The said order was valid till next date of hearing and was made subject to the objections from the respondents. 3. The respondents have appeared in the suit and have filed their written statements. They also claimed to have filed an application seeking vacation of the interim directions of status quo passed by the trial Court. The next date of hearing in the suit is stated to have been fixed for 14th July, 2020. 4. While the suit was pending adjudication before the trial Court, the petitioner-plaintiff filed an application seeking a direction to SHO R.S.Pura to implement the interim order dated 04.12.2018 passed by the trial Court in its letter and spirit. It was complained that the respondents, who have been duly served with the order of status quo, are not showing any respect to the order and have occupied the suit land and started raising construction. 5. The trial Court took note of the allegations and dismissed the said application on the ground that admittedly, the suit was based on the agreement to sell and as per the endorsement made at the back of the agreement to sell, the petitioner-plaintiff had taken full and final payment and delivered the possession to the respondents-defendants. As a matter of fact, the trial Court went into the merits of the suit and sustainability of the interim order passed by it, though it was only called upon to issue directions to the police agency to ensure that the interim order is respected by both the parties and the position existing on spot is not changed. As a matter of fact, the trial Court went into the merits of the suit and sustainability of the interim order passed by it, though it was only called upon to issue directions to the police agency to ensure that the interim order is respected by both the parties and the position existing on spot is not changed. 6 It is this order dated 03.06.2020 passed by the trial Court, the petitioner is aggrieved of and has invoked the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court vested under Article 227 of the Constitution. 7. This Court while entertaining the petition, vide its order dated 05.06.2020 directed the SHO, Police Station, R.S.Pura to ensure that none of the parties raised any construction or changed the position existing on spot. 8. M/S Johal and associates have appeared for the respondents and have filed an application seeking vacation of the interim order dated 05.06.2020 on the ground that the petitioner has no cause on merits in the suit and the same is not maintainable on the face of it. 9. Mr. Johal, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents, supports the impugned order passed by the trial Court and submits that the trial Court declined to exercise the discretion and direct the implementation of its interim order through the agency of police only after finding no prima facie case in favour of the petitioner. 10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, I am of the view that the trial Court committed an error by adjudicating upon the merits of controversy raised in the suit while deciding the application seeking compliance of its interim order of status quo. It is not in dispute that the trial Court while entertaining the suit and issuing summons to the respondents, passed an interim order of status quo to preserve the lis. The order was indeed an interim order subject to modification, vacation and variation on motion by the respondents. 11. As noted above, the respondents have filed their written statement as also an application for vacation of the interim order of status quo. The order was indeed an interim order subject to modification, vacation and variation on motion by the respondents. 11. As noted above, the respondents have filed their written statement as also an application for vacation of the interim order of status quo. So long as the interim order of status quo remains in operation and is not specifically vacated or varied or modified, it is the bounden duty of the trial Court to ensure that its order is implemented in letter and spirit and if need be, the police agency can be called upon to do so. 12. In the cases of this nature where there is dispute with regard to the factum of possession, the order of status quo has the potential of engaging the parties to commit a breach of peace on spot and in that eventuality, the order to the police to ensure compliance of the interim directions may be called for. 13. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the trial Court exceeded its jurisdiction, rather exercised the jurisdiction not vested in it by touching upon the merits of the suit while deciding the application seeking implementation of its order. In that view of the matter, I am inclined to interfere in the matter in the exercise of supervisory jurisdiction vested under Article 227 of the Constitution and quash the order passed by the trial Court, impugned in this petition. Ordered accordingly. The parties are relegated to the trial Court which shall hear them on 14th July, 2020 on the maintainability of the suit as also the sustainability of the interim order of status quo and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Till the trial Court takes a decision with regard to the maintainability of the suit or with regard to the sustainability of the order of status quo, the parties shall abide by the interim order of status quo as directed earlier by this Court. SHO Police Station, R.S.Pura shall ensure that none of the parties violate the order of status quo. With the aforesaid directions, this petition is disposed of accordingly along with connected CMs. CCP(S) 168/2020 In the light of the order passed in CR No. 42/2020, this contempt petition has been rendered in fructuous. The same is, accordingly, disposed of along with connected CM.