Punjab-Haryana High Court
Murti And Others vs Stm. Mahendro And Others on 6 November, 2024
Author: Vikas Bahl
Bench: Vikas Bahl
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:144110
CR No.1478 of 2024 & [1]
CR No.1483 of 2024
119 (2 cases)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
1. CR No.1478 of 2024 (O&M)
Date of decision: 06.11.2024
Murti and others ...Petitioners
Versus
Mahendro and others ...Respondents
2. CR No.1483 of 2024 (O&M)
Daya Parkash and others ...Petitioners
Versus
Mahendro and others ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: Mr. Ashwani Gaur, Advocate and
Ms. Shivangi Sharma, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
Mr. Ashish Aggarwal, Senior Advocate with
Ms. Aashna Aggarwal, Advocate,
for respondents No.1 to 5 and 7.
Mr. Ajay Chaudhary, Advocate
for respondents No.6 and 8.
****
VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)
1. By this common order the aforementioned two revision
petitions i.e. CR-1478-2024 and CR-1483-2024 shall stand disposed of.
2. Challenge in both the revision petitions is to the order dated
08.01.2024 vide which the objections filed by Ram Dulari, Rishi Kant and
Mamta have been accepted after framing the issues and leading detailed
evidence and it has further been observed that fraud vitiates everything and
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:144110
accordingly, judgment(s) and decree(s) dated 28.10.2015/03.12.2015 have
been set aside.
3. Learned Senior Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 5 and 7 as well
as learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.6 and 8 have
raised preliminary objection to the effect that the impugned order is
appealable inasmuch as in effect the respondents were third parties and their
objections have been accepted after framing issues and after granting liberty
to all the parties to lead evidence. It is further submitted that earlier
objections filed by the objector were dismissed and civil appeal was filed
against the said order and the matter was remanded by the First Appellate
Court vide order dated 21.05.2019 and it is in pursuance of the remand
order that impugned order had been passed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in view
of objections raised by learned Senior Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 5
and 7 as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.6
and 8, he seeks permission of this Court to withdraw both the revision
petitions with liberty to the petitioners to file an appeal. It is however
submitted that an interim order was passed in favour of the petitioners on
08.04.2024 to the effect that operation of the impugned order qua
restoration of the possession under Section 144 CPC be kept in abeyance. It
is thus submitted, that the petitioners would file an appeal within a period of
one month from today and the First Appellate Court be directed to decide
the appeal on merits. It is further prayed that for a period of one month, the
said interim order be continued.
5. Learned Senior Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 5 and 7 as well
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:144110
as learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.6 and 8 have
submitted that they have no objection to the said course of action but have
submitted that the grant of interim relief for a period of one month should
not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the First
Appellate Court should decide the case independently and in accordance
with law.
6. Keeping in view the abovesaid facts and circumstances, both
the revision petitions are dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the
petitioners to file an appeal before the First Appellate Court against the
order dated 08.01.2024. In case, the said appeal is filed within a period of
one month from today, then the First Appellate Court is directed to decide
the same on merits. Interim order dated 08.04.2024 to the effect "operation
of the impugned order qua restoration of the possession under Section 144
CPC be kept in abeyance" would continue for the said period of one month.
The grant of said interim relief for a period of one month should not be
construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The First Appellate
Court would decide the appeal independently in accordance with law after
taking into consideration all the arguments raised by all the parties
concerned.
7. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
disposed of in view of the abovesaid order.
06.11.2024 (VIKAS BAHL)
Pawan/sandeep JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
Whether reportable:- Yes/No
3 of 3
