Civil Misc.No.8803 C-II of 2006 and C.R.No.2401 of 2006 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Misc.No.8803 C-II of 2006 and C.R.No.2401 of 2006 (O&M) Date of Decision: 28.1.2008 Ramzan .....Petitioner Vs. Ram Lok ...Respondent .... CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA **** Present : Ms.Kamalpreet, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.D.K.Kaushal, Advocate for the respondent. ... RAJIVE BHALLA, J (Oral) The petitioner has challenged the order dated 30.3.2006 passed by Additional District Judge, Panchkula and the order dated 25.2.2006 passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division) Panchkula. Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner's application for grant of a temporary injunction has been wrongly dismissed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Panchkula, as has the appeal by the Additional District Judge, Panchkula. The respondent, seeks to deprive the petitioner of his property by relying upon a fraudulent gift deed. The petitioner is in possession of the suit property and in order to protect the suit property, the learned Courts below, should have restrained the respondent from alienating the property during the pendency of the suit. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the petitioner has challenged a gift deed dated 10.1.1984 after more Civil Misc.No.8803 C-II of 2006 and C.R.No.2401 of 2006 (O&M) 2 than 20 years. The respondent was in possession of the property but has sold the same on 26.5.2006. The petitioner has not produced any material to evidence his possession. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned orders. The relief of grant of an injunction, to restrain the respondent from alienating the suit property has become infructuous, as the respondent has sold the property on 26.5.2006. As regards the prayer for grant of an injunction regarding possession, the land in dispute measures 9 Bighas. The jamabandi for the year 1999-2000, produced during arguments, shows the respondent in possession of 4 Kanals. On a specific query addressed to counsel for the respondent, as to the person in possession with respect to the remaining land, counsel for the respondent failed to come up with any satisfactory answer, except for placing reliance upon recitals in the gift deed regarding delivery of possession. The recitals in the gift deed are belied by the contents of the Jamabandi. Consequently, orders passed by the learned Courts below are modified to the extent that the parties shall maintain status-quo, with respect to possession during the pendency of the suit. The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly. 28.1.2008 ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) GS JUDGE