Allahabad High Court
Prem Narayan vs Civil Judge (J.D.) Ram Sanehighat ... on 17 September, 2019
Author: Sangeeta Chandra
Bench: Sangeeta Chandra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 25 Case :- MISC. SINGLE No. - 25387 of 2019 Petitioner :- Prem Narayan Respondent :- Civil Judge (J.D.) Ram Sanehighat Barabanki & Anr. Counsel for Petitioner :- Awadhesh Kumar Singh Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.
(1) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
(2) This petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for a direction to the opposite party no.1, Civil Judge (J.D.), Ram Sanehighat, District Barabanki, to consider and decide the application of the petitioner filed for temporary injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 of the C.P.C. on 27.08.2019 in Original Suit No.163/2019 (Prem Narayan Vs. Mohd. Mohsin) and restrain the private-respondents/defendants not to create any hindrance in the peaceful possession of the petitioner over the land of Gata No.33 ad-measuring 0.1550 hectare situated at Village Ahmadpur, Pargana Suryapur, Tehsil Ram Sanehighat, District Barabanki.
(3) It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a recorded tenure holder of the plot in question but the respondents are creating hindrance in the peaceful possession and enjoying of the said plot as they want to buy the said plot on throw away price. The plot in question is situated at Lucknow Faizabad National Highway and its commercial value is much more than the offered price by the private-respondents in the Regular Suit. An application for temporary injunction was also filed alongwith the Suit but the same has not been considered. The counsel for the petitioner referred to a questionnaire which has been filed as Annexure-4 to this petition which shows that the matter in respect of plot in question is fixed for hearing before the learned Trial Court on 27.09.2019 and the defendants have also appeared in the aforesaid suit on 27.08.2019 alongwith their Advocate.
(4) It is not clear whether the defendants have filed any objection to the application for temporary injunction. It is also not clear whether any Commission Report has been summoned by the Trial Court or not.
(5) It is expected that the learned Trial Court shall decide the temporary injunction application strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, keeping in mind the three conditions for grant of temporary injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 of the C.P.C. The private-respondents/ defendants to the aforesaid suit may be given last opportunity to file the objection and the temporary injunction application be decided thereafter, in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him.
(6) Accordingly, this writ petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 17.9.2019 PAL