1 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1631/2008. Om Prakash Vs. A.D.J., Raisinghnagar & Ors. Date of Order :: 16th May 2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI Mr. Hemant Kumar Jain, for the petitioner. BY THE COURT: This writ petition is directed against the order dated 19.02.2008 (Annex. 5) as passed by the Additional District Judge, Raisinghnagar in Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2/2008 affirming the order dated 25.01.2008 (Annex.4) as passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Raisinghnagar in Civil Misc. Case No. 1/2008 whereby a temporary injunction has been issued against the defendant-petitioner not to obstruct 15' wide way for the reach to the plot of the plaintiff. Assailing the orders aforesaid, learned counsel for the defendant-petitioner has strenuously contended that the learned Appellate Court has not at all looked into the record of the case and without dealing with any of the submission of the petitioner, has mechanically endorsed the findings of the Trial Court; that the learned subordinate Courts have failed to consider that the plaintiff was trying to carve out a new way through the land of the petitioner though no such sanctioned way exists on the site; that the question about the right of way as claimed by the plaintiff is yet to be decided and before final decision in the suit, granting a new way to the plaintiff 2 from out of the property of the petitioner cannot be said to be justified; that the plaintiff has no prima facie case in his favour and balance of convenience is also in favour of the petitioner for the plaintiff having alternative way available to reach his plot via the adjoining plot of his brother. Having examined the matter in its totality, this Court is unable to find any jurisdictional error that could be said to be leading to substantial failure of justice so as to consider interference in writ jurisdiction. The learned Trial Court has found after examining the material available on record that other than that claimed by the plaintiff, no alternative way is available for the reach to the plaintiff's plot. The learned Trial Court has also observed that the dispute about right of way could only be decided after taking evidence in the original suit but prima facie a case of infringement of civil rights of the plaintiff is made out; and that the plaintiff would suffer comparatively greater inconvenience and irreparable injury if the way in question is closed. The Appellate Court has affirmed the order passed by the Trial Court essentially on the consideration that no ground has been made out for interference in the discretionary order granting temporary injunction, particularly when no alternative way is available to the plaintiff. The submission about the plaintiff seeking to carve out a new way hitherto not existing does not make out a case of 3 jurisdictional error on the part of the learned subordinate Courts in the matter of grant of temporary injunction. The learned Courts below have indicated that the basic question about the right in relation to the disputed way shall have to be decided in the suit after framing of the issues and taking evidence. However, as an interim arrangement during the pendency of the suit, the learned subordinate Courts have found it necessary to restrain the defendant-petitioner from closing the way in dispute and have permitted the plaintiff to use the same after finding that there is no alternative way available. It is not correct to suggest that such arrangement attains finality merely because of passing of the order for temporary injunction. The prima facie finding by the learned subordinate Courts that the plaintiff has no alternative way does not appear absolutely perverse so as to be re-considered in this writ petition. In the overall facts and circumstances of the case, existing such prima facie finding, if the learned Trial Court has made an arrangement during the pendency of the suit, essentially on the considerations relating to the easement of necessity, the order granting temporary injunction remains unexceptionable. The writ petition stands rejected. Mohan/ (DINESH MAHESHWARI 4 ), J.