COCP No.1663 of 2009 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.1663 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: September 11, 2009. Vinod Bala Sharma ...Petitioner(s) v. Hoshiar Singh & Ors. ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG Present: Shri Harkesh Manuja, Advocate, for the petitioner. ORDER Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. (Oral): The grievance of the petitioner in this case is that despite the status quo order granted by the Additional District Judge, Sonepat in the proceedings under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC regarding existing state-of- affairs over the suit property till the decision of the main suit, the respondents have continued with the construction over the suit property which is apparent from the photographs attached with this petition and, therefore, the respondents are guilty of violating the aforesaid status quo order granted by the Additional District Judge, Sonepat. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Admittedly, the petitioner has a remedy under Order 39 Rule 2- A of the Code of Civil Procedure for punishing the respondents for disobedience of the interim injunction granted by the civil court. The facts COCP No.1663 of 2009 -: 2 :- regarding continuation of construction over the suit property during the currency of the status quo order, can be appreciated only by adducing evidence. The contention of the petitioner that she also complained before the police authorities vide Annexure P-3 yet they have failed to redress her grievance, can also be agitated before an appropriate forum. Thus, in view of the aforesaid, I am not inclined to take cognizance of this petition. Dismissed. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to seek any other appropriate remedy, in accordance with law. September 11, 2009. [ Rakesh Kumar Garg ] kadyan Judge