IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.1590 of 2010 Date of decision : 09.3.2010 Satbir Singh and another … Petitioners Versus Gram Panchayat Village Jatola and others …Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr.Surender Saini, Advocate for the petitioners. Rajesh Bindal, J. Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 8.2.2010 passed by the learned Additional District Judge Sonepat vide which order dated 23.11.2009 of learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Divn.) Sonepat was upheld and petitioners’ application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 was dismissed. Petitioners in the present case have filed a suit for permanent injunction claiming that though the land in question is owned by respondent No.1 i.e. Gram Panchayat but the plaintiffs-petitioners are in possession thereon for the last 50 years and the Gram Panchayat was threatening to dispossess the plaintiffs-petitioners forcibly and illegally. Both the Courts below found that the petitioners had not been able to produce any material on record to prima facie establish that possession on the suit land was of the plaintiffs-petitioners. From the revenue record, it was established that Gram Panchayat was owner in possession on the suit land. The Gram Panchayat had passed a resolution for construction of dispensary at the site which was for the benefit of the inhabitants of the village. With this material on record, I am of the opinion that no illegality has been committed by the courts below in dismissing the application for interim stay. No ground for interference with impugned order is made out. Dismissed. [Rajesh Bindal] Judge 09.3.2010 sd