IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 16.08.2010 C.R.No.3299 of 2010 Darshan Singh and another ...Petitioners Versus Kulwant Singh and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present : Mr. Vivek Suri, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the respondents. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral) The plaintiffs are in revision aggrieved against the order passed by the Courts below, whereby the application for grant of ad interim injunction has been dismissed. As per the petitioners, the land in dispute abuts passage, whereas the respondents have taken up a stand in the written statement that the land is a public passage and vests in the Panchayat. Both the Courts have found that since the land in dispute is said to be public passage, therefore, the plaintiff-petitioners have no cause to seek ad interim injunction. In case of a land vesting in Panchayat being a public passage, the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is barred. Such question cannot be decided by the Civil Court. In view of the said fact, I do not find any patent illegality or irregularity in the order passed by the Courts below, which may warrant any interference in exercise of the revisional jurisdiction of this Court. Dismissed. 16.08.2010 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE