Punjab-Haryana High Court
Avtar Singh vs Amandeep Singh And Others on 18 April, 2026
COCP-2997
2997-2024 (O&M) -11-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
206 COCP
COCP-2997-2024 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 18.04.2026
Avtar Singh .... Petitioner
Versus
Amandeep Singh and others .... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA
Present: - Mr. AS Gagrha, Advocate for the petitioner.
Respondents No. 1 to 6 are present in person with
Mr. Amardeep Singh Mann, Advocate
Advocate.
(through V.C.)
NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL)
1. The present contempt petition has been filed alleging violation of order dated 22.12.2023 (Annexure P P-3) passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division),, SAS Nagar, Mohali Mohali.
2. On the last date of hearing i.e. 25.03.2026,, following order has been passed by this Court:-
Court:
"CM-3220-CII-2025 Prayer in this application is for placing on record the final order on application under Order 39 Rule 1 CPC as Annexure R-3.
The application is allowed subject to all just exceptions and the aforesaid order is taken on record as Annexure R-3.
COCP-2997-2024 Present contempt petition has been filed alleging violation of order dated 22.12.2023 (Annexure P P-3)
3) passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), SAS Nagar, Mohali in Civil Suit No.1125 of 2023 titled as "Avtar Singh vs. Amandeep Singh and others", wherein it was directed as follows :-
"...Heard on exparte ad ad-interim interim injunction. The application under order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC is duly supported by an affidavit, copy of Jamabandi for the RISHU KATARIA 2026.04.20 13:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. COCP-2997 2997-2024 (O&M) -22- year 2016-17, 17, copy of sale deed, copy of latha, copy of site plan and copy of Aadhar Card.
Thus, in order to ensure the right of the plaintiff is not violated and also, to balance the rights of the defendants and to maintain equity, the parties are directed to maintain the status quo regarding the existing position of the suit property and throwing of waste/sewerage water of their house, constructed over below mentioned suit property/l property/land and as depicted in site map...."
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in blatant violation of the above said status quo direction, the respondents are not only releasing sewerage water into the land of the petitioner but are also raising construction thereupon. In this regard, learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the photographs (Annexure P P-
5). It is further pointed out that the petitioner had also moved an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, which was allowed owed by the learned trial Court vide order dated 17.1.2025 (Annexure R R-3)
3) thereby confirming the initial stay granted vide order dated 22.12.2025. Learned counsel refers to the said order and submits that even vide order dated 17.1.2025, it has been direct directed ed that "...Accordingly, the present stay application stands allowed with directions to defendants No.1 to 6 to refrain from discharging the water of their house towards the fields of plaintiff and they are further directed to keep the window in question covered ered till the final decision of the case..."
case...".
Learned counsel submits that despite the above said order, the respondents continue to raise the construction as evident from the photographs (Annexure R R-1). It is pointed out that the construction depicted at gground round level in photographs (Annexure P-5) 5) is shown to be at lintel level in photographs (Annexure R-1).
Learned counsel for the respondents submits that he has no instructions with regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
In view ew of the same, let the respondents be present in person before the Court on the next date of hearing.
Adjourned to 18.4.2026.
18.4.2026."
3. In compliance of the order dated 25.03.2026 6 reproduced above, all the respondents are present in person in Court.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents appearing through V.C. submits that there is no violation of the order dated 22.12.2023 (Annexure P-3)
3) passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), SAS RISHU KATARIA 2026.04.20 13:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. COCP-2997 2997-2024 (O&M) -33- Nagar Mohali, Mohali as the said order stood modified by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), SAS Nagar Mohali Mohali,, vide order dated 17.01.2025 (Annexure R-3).
R . Relevant extract of which reads as follows:
follows:-
"xxx xxx xxx
5. ....Though defendants no. 1 to 3 and plaintiff are co-sharers but they cannot take advantage of their wrong activities in the garb of principle that no injunction order can be granted against co-sharers sharers especially when the other co-sharers sharers is in exclusive possession of particular area.
Accordingly, the present stay application stands allowed with directions to defendants no. 1 to 6 to refrain from discharging the water of their house towards the fields of plaintiff and they are further directed to keep the window in question covered till final decision of the pr present case."
5. It is, therefore, submitted that order dated 22.12.2023 (Annexure P-3) P 3) stood merged with the order dated 17.01.2025.. As such, there is no violation or willful disobedience of the order Annexure P P-3.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently controverts that submissions and points out that from the perusal of photograph (Annexure P-5), P 5), it is clear that the respondents had raised construction in August, 2024 at the site.
7. Learned counsel for the respondents again opposes the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the said construction, if any, was raised by the respondents after 17.01.2025.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that that present contempt petition was filed on 23.08.2024 23.08.2024 and the photographs (Annexure P-5),, therefore, are exactly prior prio to that.. As such, the respondents have violated that order dated 22.12.2023 (Annexure P P-3).
9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
RISHU KATARIA 2026.04.20 13:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.COCP-2997 2997-2024 (O&M) -44-
10. From the afore-noted noted rival contenti contentions ons of learned counsel for the parties, it is clear that there are disputed questions of facts involved in the present dispute which cannot be ascertained by this Court.
Furthermore, respondents No. 1 to 6 who are present in person have undertaken n that they shall not release the sewerage water into the fields of the petitioner and shall not open the window till the pendency of the main suit.
11. Subject to the aforesaid undertaking of respondents No. 1 to 6, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the instant petition, with liberty to the petitioner to take recourse to the appropriate remedy, in accordance with law.
12. Permitted to do so.
13. Dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty aforesaid aforesaid.
14. Rule stands discharged.
15. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
18.04.2026
8.04.2026 ( NIDHI GUPTA )
rishu JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No RISHU KATARIA 2026.04.20 13:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.