Ram Pat vs Laltu Ram
1998 Latest Caselaw 998 Del

JUDGMENT

Mukul Mudgal, J.

1. None appears. This revision petition is of the year 1989 and arises out of an impugned order dated 3.5.89 passed by learned Senior Sub-judge, Delhi in MCA No. 580/89, so it is taken up for final disposal.

2. The impugned order granting injunction in favour of plaintiff/respondent herein proceeds on the basis that the plaintiff has made out a prima facie case and that balance of convenience lies in favour of plaintiff and irreparable loss and injury would be caused to the plaintiff/petitioner if the defendant is allowed to raise further construction on the suit land. Accordingly, the Sr. Sub-Judge was entirely right in reversing, the order of the learned Sub-Judge by which the application of the plaintiff/petitioner under Order 39, Rule 1, CPC was dismissed. The Senior Sub-Judge in appeal rightly found that the signatures of the petitioner's father on the receipt in respect of the suit land was disputed as his father was illiterate and used to put thumb marks on documents.

3. This revision petition being against the interim order restraining the defendant from raising any further construction on the suit land till the disposal of the suit, does not warrant interference. Even assuming that the plea of the petitioner that there is an admission of the respondent/plaintiff in the plaint that he has possession, is correct, the order of status quo causes no prejudice.

Accordingly, this revision petition is dismissed.

There shall be no order as to costs.