Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for opposite party no.1.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has filed a suit for permanent injunction against opposite party nos.2 to 8 before the Civil Court and an application for temporary injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 C.P.C. was also moved on 31st May, 2010 and the learned Civil Court after hearing the plaintiff on that application ordered to issue notices to defendants and listed the matter for hearing on 3rd July, 2010. On that very date a writ was also issued to the Advocate Commissioner for inspection and preparation of the site-plant of the property in dispute. It is also submitted that on 14.06.2010, an application was moved for ordering to maintain status quo as the defendants were intending to raise the construction over the land in dispute. The learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) rejected that application after observing that since notices have already been issued to the defendants and the Commissioner's report has not been received, hence it would not be proper to pass any order for maintaining the status quo. The said order dated 14.06.2010 has been challenged in this writ petition. It has also been submitted that the Commissioner's report was filed in the Court on 14.06.2010 after the impugned order was passed by the Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner has shown the certified copy of the Commissioner's report which does not reveal that any construction activity was found by the Commissioner at the land in dispute. It is an admitted case of the petitioner that opposite parties no.2 to 8 are also joint owners of the land in suit and no partition has been affected between the petitioner and opposite parties no.2 to 8 by metes and bound. Learned counsel has submitted that the concerned Civil Judge be directed to dispose of the application for temporary injunction after considering the Commissioner's report within a stipulated time.
Looking to the aforesaid circumstances of the case, there is no sufficient ground for making any interim order in respect of land in dispute without hearing the opposite parties. The Civil Judge concerned is, however, directed to dispose of the interim injunction application expeditiously in accordance with law within 15 days from 01.07.2010.
With the above observation, the petition is disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 23.6.2010 ank