IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 4153 of 2009 Date of Decision : December 03, 2009 Ram Singh and others ....Petitioners Versus Ram Lal and another ....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present : Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Pritam Saini, Advocate for respondent No.1. T.P.S. MANN, J. (Oral) Civil Revision No. 4153 of 2009 -2- In his suit, the plaintiff-respondent had prayed for a decree for permanent injunction so as to restrain the defendants from encroaching/blocking Rasta No. 225 in any manner and from raising any sort of construction over the same. In their written statement, the defendants admitted that Rasta No.225 was a public passage being used by them and other inhabitants of the village for ingress and egress. They denied that they had encroached/blocked the said Rasta. According to them, they had tried to construct Chhajja at a height of 16' from the ground level. No part of the Chhajja is being constructed over the Rasta in question. In fact, the defendants have placed four iron girders, each 3' long, for setting up the Chhajja and, therefore, no obstruction would be caused to the inhabitants of the village for ingress and egress. Both the learned Courts below, while deciding the prayer for temporary injunction, restrained the defendants from raising any construction beyond their boundary at any height on the side of Aam Rasta No.225 till the disposal of the suit on merits. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order. In case the defendants are allowed to construct Chhajja protruding over Aam Rasta No.225 that would make suit of the plaintiff infructuous. On the other hand, if the interim order is allowed to continue indefinitely, that would not serve the interest of justice as the defendants would have to wait for the decision of the suit before carrying on with the Civil Revision No. 4153 of 2009 -3- construction of Chhajja. Under these circumstances, this Court is of the view that a direction be issued to the learned trial Court to expedite the decision of the trial of the case. Resultantly, the revision is disposed of by directing the trial Court to make all possible efforts to decide the suit within three months from the receipt of a certified copy of this order. ( T.P.S. MANN ) December 03, 2009 JUDGE satish