Hon'Ble Alok Kumar Verma vs Harish Tiwari And Others"
2022 Latest Caselaw 3553 UK

                      Office Notes,
                   reports, orders or
SL.                 proceedings or
         Date                                      COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No                   directions and
                   Registrar's order
                    with Signatures
      09.11.2022                        AO No. 377 of 2022
                                        Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma, J.

The proposed Appeal has been filed under Order XLIII Rule 1 (r) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, against the order dated 17.08.2022, passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Rishikesh, District Dehradun in Original Suit No. 100 of 2021, "Neeraj Kumar and Another vs. Harish Tiwari and Others", by which, the learned Trial Court has restrained the appellants-defendants from interfering in the ownership and possession of the respondents-plaintiffs and from interfering in raising of new construction over the suit property by the respondents-plaintiffs.

Heard Mr. Piyush Garg, the learned counsel for the appellants, and Mr. Ramji Shrivastava, the learned counsel for the respondents.

Mr. Piyush Garg, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, submitted that the suit property was given by one Bhanwar Lal (Khatauni Annexure No. 1/1) to the Panchayat School Nirman Samiti Vankhandi, Rishikesh, District Dehradun and the said property is registered in the record of Nagar Palika, Rishikesh in the name of Panchayati School. He further submitted that the final relief, as prayed in the plaint, cannot be granted at the interim stage.

On the other hand, Mr. Ramji Shrivastava, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents, submitted that the respondents are the owner and in possession of the suit property by virtue of the sale deed. He further submitted that the final relief, at the stage of the interim stage, can be granted and in support of the said submissions, he has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court, passed in "Deoraj vs. State of Maharashtra and Others (2004) 4 SCC 697".

Admit.

The learned counsel appearing for the respondents requested two weeks' time to file objection to the stay application.

Mr. Ramji Shrivastava, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents, submitted that the respondents undertake that the respondents are not going to construct the said property till the next date of listing.

List this case on 23.11.2022.

(Alok Kumar Verma, J.) 09.11.2022

Shiksha