Court No. - 40
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 8546 of 2019 Petitioner :- Sardar Charanjeet Singh And Another Respondent :- District Judge Agra And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amit Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- Rishabh Agarwal,Tarun Agrawal
Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J.
A suit for permanent injunction was filed by the respondents. They also filed an application for temporary injunction praying that a temporary injunction be granted to the plaintiffs restraining the defendants from interfering in the peaceful possession of the plaintiffs over the second floor of the building in question. The Trial Court on 16.5.2019 passed an order for the maintenance of the status-quo. However, when the defendants created obstructions and did not allow the plaintiffs to go to the second floor, an application was filed on 22.5.2019 for police help. This application was adjudicated upon on 29.5.2019 and it was ordered that the staircase be used by the parties jointly. This order was appealed against. When the Appellate Court dismissed the appeal, the instant writ petition has been filed.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that when there is a specific provision in the Code of Civil Procedure i.e. Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 for the grant of temporary injunction, then any application under section 151 C.P.C. was not maintainable and, therefore, the order which was passed by the Trial Court on 29.5.2019 could not have been passed. Learned counsel also submitted that the plaint and the application for temporary injunction did not state anywhere that the staircase was a joint one.
Learned counsel appearing for the plaintiffs-respondents, however, submitted that when the staircase was the only staircase by which the plaintiffs could have gone to the second floor, then the defendants could not have stopped the plaintiffs from using the same and he pointed out from various paragraphs of the plaint and the application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. that it was stated that there was only one staircase to go to the second floor.
The Court upon hearing the petitioners and the respondents and after perusing the records finds that there is no error in the order. When an order of status-quo was passed, it meant that status-quo also be maintained with regard to the usage of the staircase also and, therefore, it was in the fitness of things that the subsequent order dated 29.5.2019 was passed. No interference is, therefore, required with the order.
The suit is of the year 2018. The Trial Court may frame issues within a period of one month from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order and, thereafter decide the suit on a day to day basis. Adjournment may be granted only under very pressing circumstances.
With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 28.11.2019 GS (Siddhartha Varma, J.)