C.R.No.7099 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No.7099 of 2008 Date of Decision : 15.10.2009 Smt. Veena Devi ...Petitioner Versus Isham Singh ...Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: Mr. Maharaj Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Advocate, for the respondent. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Challenge in the present revision petition is to the order passed by the learned first Appellate Court, whereby the parties were directed to maintain status quo regarding alienation and possession over the suit property. The plaintiff-respondent has filed a suit for declaration claiming title over the suit property. The plaintiff claims to be in possession of the land and, thus, sought restraint order against the defendant from interfering in his possession. The defendant is widowed daughter-in-law of the plaintiff. As per the facts on record, property in dispute records the husband of the defendant as owner of the same. Whereas, as per the plaintiff, the property was purchased from the funds of Joint Hindu Family and, therefore, the property though in the name of the husband of the defendant is a Joint Hindu Family property. Such question is to be decided after opportunities given to the parties to lead evidence. In view of the said fact, I do not find any patent illegality or C.R.No.7099 of 2008 2 irregularity in the order passed, whereby the parties have been directed to maintain status quo regarding alienation and possession of the suit land. Since, the dispute is within the family, I deem it appropriate to direct the learned trial Court to decide the suit expeditiously, preferably within one year from the date already fixed by the learned trial Court. With the said direction, the petition stands disposed of. 15.10.2009 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE