IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No.1171 of 2007 (O&M) Date of decision : 18.12.2009 1] Dharamvir and others … Appellants Versus Gograj …Respondent RSA No.1691 of 2007 (O&M) 2] Gograj … Appellant Versus Dharamvir and others …Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.N.D.Achint, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.Sanjay Mittal, Advocate for the respondents. Sabina, J. This order shall dispose of two appeals i.e. RSA No.1171 of 2007 titled as Dharamvir and others Vs. Gograj and RSA No.1691 of 2007 titled as Godraj Vs. Dharambir and others as the same have arisen out of one suit. The plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction praying that defendants be restrained from interfering in his peaceful possession and ousting him by illegal ejectment from the shop in dispute. It is further prayed that in case, during the pendency of suit, the defendants succeed in taking forcibly possession then a decree for mandatory injunction for restoration of possession be passed. Civil Judge (Jr.Divn.) Rewari vide judgment and decree dated 18.7.2006 dismissed the suit of the plaintiff. Aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff preferred an appeal. The Additional District Judge, Rewari vide judgment and decree dated 16.1.2007 allowed the appeal and restrained the RSA No.1171 of 2007 (O&M) RSA No.1691 of 2007(O&M) defendants from interfering in the peaceful possession of the plaintiff as a licensee over land measuring 8 X 10 feet, except in due course of law. Hence, the present appeal filed by both the parties. Learned counsel for the defendants has submitted that defendants will not dispossess the plaintiff from the suit land except in due course of law. Learned counsel further submits that ejectment proceedings were pending in the Court below and the parties would be bound by the decision passed in the said ejectment petition subject to appeal etc. Learned counsel for the plaintiff has submitted that both the appeals be disposed of in view of the statement made by learned counsel for the defendants. Accordingly, both the appeals are disposed of with a direction that the defendants are restrained from dispossessing the plaintiff from the suit land except due course of law. [ Sabina ] Judge 18.12.2009 sd 2