← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCR/130/2015dismissed

Narinder Singh v. Sujjan Singh And Another

2015-01-08Mr. Justice R.P. Nagrath2 pages

VINOD KUMAR 2015.01.13 09:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CR No.130 of 2015 [ 1 ] ****

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CR No.130 of 2015 Date of decision:08.01.2015 Narinder Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

Sujjan Singh and another

...Respondents

CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain

Present:

Mr. R.D.Bawa, Advocate, for the petitioner.

***** Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.

This petition is against the order dated 14.10.2014, dismissing the application filed by the petitioner under Order 21 Rule 32 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

In short, the petitioner filed Civil Suit No.253 of 1995 which was decreed in his favour on 09.03.1998 to the effect that "it is ordered that suit of the plaintiff succeeds and same is hereby decreed to the extent that defendants are hereby permanently restrained from dispossessing the plaintiff from the suit land measuring 126 kanal 16 marlas, as fully detailed in the head note of the plaint, illegally and forcibly except in due course of law".

It is alleged by the petitioner that in the past, the defendants had tried to interfere in his possession as a result thereof, he had lodged two

VINOD KUMAR 2015.01.13 09:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CR No.130 of 2015 [ 2 ] **** FIRs against them but at the same time, it is admitted by him that both the criminal cases registered against the respondents were dismissed by the Competent Courts and they were acquitted.

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is a third FIR registered against the respondents for interference in his possession but it is also admitted by him that there is no reference of the said FIR in the execution application filed by him much thereafter. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and examining the record with his able assistance, I am of the considered opinion that there is no error in the order of the Court below in dismissing the application after discussing both oral as well as documentary evidence led by the parties. Thus, I do not find any merit in the present revision petition and hence, the same is hereby dismissed.

January 08, 2015 Rakesh Kumar Jain vinod* Judge