IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CR NO. 5401/2008 Date of Decision:14.1.2009. Milkh Raj and another ..........Petitioners. Versus Satbir Singh and others ..........Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH. Present: Mr.P.K.Ganga,Advocate for the petitioners-planitiffs. JASWANT SINGH,J(Oral). By filing this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioners-plaintiffs have prayed for quashing of the order dated 21.4.2004 (Annexure P/1) passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Sirsa whereby their application under Order 39 Rules 2- A CPC was dismissed with costs; and the order dated 2.5.2008 (Annexure P/2) passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Sirsa, whereby the appeal filed by them against the order dated 21.4.2004 (Annexure P/1) has also been dismissed with costs. Briefly, the facts are that a civil suit was filed by the petitioners under Section 92 CPC with the permission of the Court , wherein the Court, after hearing the parties and in their presence, had granted ad interim injunction against defendants 1 to 4 i.e.Mahant Amar Nath, Baba Atma Swarup, Mahant Swarn Dass and Mahant Puran Dass, restraining them from alienating/transferring the property of the Trust by creating any charge over Trust property till the final decision of the suit, vide order dated 30.8.1999. CR NO. 5401/2008 2 A copy of the said order granting ad interim injunction was brought to the notice of Halqa Patwari, Sub Registrar and also entered in the Rapat Roznamcha. It is alleged that respondent no.1 Mahant Amar Nath, after passing of the ad interim injunction order dated 30.8.1999 and during its operation had executed a 99 years lease in favour of Satbir Singh- respondent no.1 herein, illegally and intentionally in collusion with Mehal Singh, the then Tehsildar-cum-Sub-Registrar, Sirsa and said Satbir Singh. An application under Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC was filed by the petitioners against Mahant Amar Nath, Satbir Singh-respondent no.1 and Mehal Singh, the then Tehsildar, for taking appropriate action for breach of ad interim injunction order dated 30.8.1999. After pleadings were complete, issues were framed. Issue no.1 was framed to the following effect:- “1. Whether the respondents have wilfully violated the order of the Court as alleged? OPP.” It would be relevant to mention here that during the pendency of the application under Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC, Mahant Amar Nath died and even the main suit was dismissed. After considering the evidence led by the parties, learned trial court concluded that Satbir Singh and Mehal Singh-respondents 1 and 2 herein cannot be held liable for breach of injunction order because they were not party to the suit. Besides that the petitioners-plaintiffs failed to prove that the injunction order related to the suit land. It was also held to be proved that on 28.8.1987, Mahant Amar Nath had become absolute owner of the property in question, which was not owned by the Trust on the CR NO. 5401/2008 3 date of the executing of the lease deed, therefore, the application filed by the petitioners was dismissed with costs. Aggrieved against the order dated 21.4.2004 (Annexure P/1), an appeal was filed by the petitioner which, as stated above, stood dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, vide order dated 2.5.2008, affirming the findings of the trial court. After hearing the counsel for the petitioners-plaintiffs and perusing the impugned orders, this Court is of the opinion that this revision petition is liable to be dismissed. It has come on record that the land in dispute in the present proceedings did not belong to the Trust which was covered in the injunction order dated 30.8.1999. It has also come on record that Satbir Singh and Mehal Singh-respondents 1 and 2 herein were not parties to the suit in which the injunction order has been passed. Learned counsel for the petitioners has not been able to point out any illegality or perversity in the impugned orders which may call for interference by this Court in the present revision petition. Dismissed in limine. 14.1.2009. (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge