CR No.47 of 2009 (O&M) and COCP No.693 of 2009 - 1 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CR No.47 of 2009 (O&M) and COCP No.693 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION: 31.08.2009 **** Sharanjit Singh . . . . Petitioner VS. Satnam Singh . . . . Respondent **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** Present: Mr. K.S. Dadwal, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. H.K. Aurora, Advocate for the respondent ***** SURYA KANT J.(ORAL) This order shall dispose of Civil Revision No.47 of 2009 and COCP No.693 of 2009 as both the matters are inter-related. The Civil Revision has been directed against the order dated 5th November, 2008 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Hoshiarpur, partly allowing the petitioner-plaintiff’s application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC and against order dated 24th December, 2008 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur, dismissing the petitioner’s appeal against the above mentioned order of the trial court. In response to the notice of motion, counsel for the respondent-defendant made a statement that the construction has already been completed and that “no further construction is being raised”. The parties were, accordingly, directed to maintain status quo. The Contempt Petition has been filed by the petitioner-plaintiff, inter alia, alleging that despite the status quo order, the respondent-defendant has started raising construction on the first floor of the house. CR No.47 of 2009 (O&M) and COCP No.693 of 2009 - 2 - Learned counsel for the parties have been heard and the impugned orders perused. It is not in dispute that both the parties have filed their respective Civil Suits to restrain each other from raising any construction and or changing the nature of the land jointly owned by them till the partition takes place. It is also not in dispute that the partition proceedings are pending before the revenue authorities since 2007. The respondent appears to have constructed a single storey residential house during the pendency of this suit. Be that as it may, no further construction can be allowed to be raised by the parties till partition takes place so that multiplicity of litigation is avoided. Learned counsel for the respondent-defendant on instructions from the defendant, who is present in Court, undertakes that no further construction whatsoever shall be raised in future on the first floor except the finishing work on the ground floor, the structure of which is already complete. Learned counsel for the petitioner-plaintiff on instruction from the plaintiff, who is also present in Court, states that if the respondent-defendant does not raise further construction, he may be permitted to complete the internal/finishing work on the ground floor without prejudice to the outcome of the partition proceedings. In view of the consensus arrived at between the parties, the Revision Petition as well as the Contempt Petition are disposed of with a direction that the respondent-defendant shall not raise any further construction on the first floor or otherwise, though he is permitted to complete the work on the ground floor at his own risk and peril. The trial Court shall appoint a Local Commission who shall visit the site, take photographs and submit the status report of the existing structure so that the parties remain bound by their respective statements. The petitioner-plaintiff though shall be entitled to carry out necessary renovations in his house, however, shall not raise further construction over the land in dispute. CR No.47 of 2009 (O&M) and COCP No.693 of 2009 - 3 - The Tehsildar, Hoshiarpur is also directed to expedite the partition proceedings in the interest of justice. Disposed of. Ordered accordingly. Rule in the Contempt Petition is discharged. Dasti. (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 31.08.2009 shonkar