CMPMO 281 of 2007. 19.9.2008 Present: Mr. Ashwani Sharma, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Bhupinder Gupta, Sr. Advocate, with Ms. Charu Gupta, counsel for the respondents. This petition has been filed by the petitioner, who is the plaintiff before the trial Court, against the order of the learned District Judge, Hamirpur, reversing the judgment and order of the learned trial Court passed in an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure preferred by the petitioner herein directing the parties to maintain status quo. The plaintiff petitioner herein had approached the trial Court in the miscellaneous application praying for interim directions restraining the defendants from interfering in any manner and dispossessing the applicants from the suit land, measuring 17 marlas. Learned trial Court, on a prima facie consideration of the matter, held that the plaintiff/ petitioner herein challenged the vestment of the suit land in the State of Himachal Pradesh and that this land was not covered by the Himachal Pradesh Village Common Lands (Vesting and Utilization) Act. The trial Court ordered the parties to maintain status quo. -2- The learned District Judge, on consideration of the material, reversed the order by observing that prima facie the suit was not maintainable and holding that the revenue entries were of no consequence. He also places reliance on the order of the Collector passed in favour of the defendant on 2.1.2007 and proceeded to vacate the order. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. At this stage, it would not be appropriate for me to resort to a mini trial determining the rights of the parties. Needless to say, even the learned District Judge should not have been emphatic in holding and deciding regarding the jurisdiction of the Court which is a matter to be determined by an issue to be framed and determination to be made on the basis of evidence to be placed on record of the case. This petition is disposed of with the following directions. The observations made by the Appellate Court shall not: i) be construed in any manner concluding that the suit was prima facie not maintainable; ii) or the value to be attached to the revenue entries etc. and other material on record. iii) Needless to say that such observation -3- shall be confined only to the decision of the application and not to the merits of the suit where the parties will be at liberty to establish their respective cases. This petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Parties shall appear before the learned trial Court on 4.11.2008. Records which have been received be sent back. Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of. September 19, 2008 (PC). (Dev Darshan Sud), J.