SA/92/2019
2023 Latest Caselaw 3197 UK

             Office Notes, reports,
             orders or proceedings
SL.
      Date     or directions and                   COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
             Registrar's order with
                  Signatures
                                      SA No. 92 of 2019
                                      With
                                      CLCON No. 279 of 2022
                                      Hon'ble Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.

Present Mr. J. C. Belwal, counsel for the appellants in both the matters.

Present Mr. Kurban Ali, counsel for the respondent in SA No. 92 of 2019.

2. Counsel for the appellants would submit the respondent/plaintiff filed a suit for decree of permanent injunction to restrain the appellants/defendants from interfering with the peaceful possession and not to raise construction over the suit property; that, the trial court decreed the suit against the present appellants and the first appeal preferred by the appellants against the judgment of the trial court was also dismissed, hence, the present second appeal.

He would further submit that the court below erred in law in dismissing the suit against the appellants vide judgment and decree dated 08.04.2019 as they being the grandson and daughter-in-law of the respondent/plaintiff have right of residence in the ancestral property in dispute.

3. Per contra, counsel for the respondent/plaintiff would submit that the respondent/plaintiff is the grandfather of the appellants and he is an elderly person of 82 years and the suit property is self-acquired property and only relief is sought that the respondent/plaintiff should not be disturbed by the grandson and daughter-in-law and they should be restraint to raise any construction over the suit property against will of the respondent/plaintiff.

He would further submit that there is no averment in the written statement of the appellants/defendants about the rights over the suit property, therefore, the appeal itself is liable to be dismissed with heavy cost.

4. Counsel for the appellants/defendants seeks time to prepare the case and place law in support of his case.

5. Counsel for the respondent/plaintiff opposed the same on the ground that the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.07.2019 granted interim order of status quo in favour of the appellants/defendants and due to the said interim order the rights of the respondent/plaintiff are at risk, therefore, the interim order should be vacated.

6. In view of the above, the interim order dated 15.07.2019 is hereby vacated and the appellants/defendants are restraint as per the decree of the trial court.

7. In the interest of justice, the adjournment is allowed.

8. List this matter on 14.12.2023 for final hearing along with connected matter.

9. Let a copy of this order be kept in the connected matter.

(Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.) 18.10.2023 Akash