1/3 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5979/2009 (Noor Khan vs. Addl.District Judge No.2,Bikaner & ors) DATE OF ORDER : 20/7/2009 HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr.Anil Vyas, for the petitioner. Heard learned counsel. This petition is directed against the order dated 6/8/2001 passed by the first appellate court, whereby, the first appellate court allowed the appeal of the defendant against the order of learned trial court dated 10/4/2001. The learned court has allowed the application for temporary injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC in favour of plaintiff, who claimed possession over the disputed suit land and filed the present suit for permanent injunction in which said application for temporary injunction has also bee filed by him, which came to be allowed by learned trial court but said order was reversed by the learned appellate court. Being aggrieved by the order of learned appellate court the plaintiff-petitioner is before this Court. This petition was also filed in this Court after the earlier revision petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed as not maintainable in view of the Supreme Court decision and amendment in law. This writ petition was filed in this Court on 4/4/2005 and since then it is pending in this Court without even 2/3 notice being issued to the opposite party. Learned counsel for the plaintiff petitioner submits that learned appellate court relied upon the patta produced by the defendant claiming title over the portion of the suit land and has erred in rejecting the temporary application of petitioner even though the Commissioner has found in its report vide Annex.3 dated 24/3/2001 that plaintiff was in possession of the suit land. The perusal of Commissioner's report indicates that out of the total land marked by point I,J,D & K in the map (page 29 of the paper book), the portion A,B,C & D was covered by the patta produced by the defendant and he had raised construction over the said portion A,B,C,D out of the total land I,J,D,K. Learned appellate court found that prima facie on the basis of patta produced by the defendant that he had right over the said portion of land A,B,C,D and had raised construction in question, therefore, the plaintiff was not entitled to temporary injunction against the defendant. Learned appellate court, therefore, reversed the order passed by the learned trial court and allowed the appeal of the defendant. Having heard learned counsel and upon perusal of the reasoning given by the learned first appellate court, this Court is 3/3 satisfied that the learned first appellate court has not committed any error in reversing the order passed by the learned trial court, relying upon the patta produced by the defendant and prima facie held that defendant was entitled to raise construction thereon irrespective of the possession of the plaintiff over the rest of the land. In view above, there is no force in the present writ petition and same is accordingly dismissed. Copy of this order be sent to opposite side. (DR.VINEET KOTHARI), J. item no.7 baweja/-