IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CM Nos. 24821-822-CII of 2009 & CR No. 6757 of 2007 (O&M) Date of Decision: 13.10.2009 Ram Dhan and others ....Petitioners. Versus Rachhpal Singh and others ...Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Mr. Kuldip Sanwal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. G.S.Walia, Advocate for the respondents. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. C.M. Nos.24821-822-CII of 2009 Allowed as prayed for. C.R. No. 6757 of 2007 The defendants have approached this Court by way of instant revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 21.7.2006 passed by the trial Court whereby the application filed by the plaintiff-respondents under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure was allowed and also the order dated 20.10.2007 vide which the appeal filed against the said order of the trial court was dismissed by the lower appellate court. C.R. No. 6757 of 2007 -2- The trial court while allowing the application of the plaintiff- respondents had restrained the defendants from encroaching upon the passage shown in the head note of the plaint and obstructing the plaintiffs from using the same. The said order of the trial court was affirmed on appeal by the lower appellate court. The observations of the lower appellate court recorded in para 5 of its judgment read as under:- “5. Shri Arvind Dutta, Advocate representing the appellants-defendants has hotly contended that at the time of arguments, he produced order dated 11.7.2001 passed by Hon'ble Mr.Justice R.L.Anand of Hon'ble High Court in which it was observed that the appellant in the present appeal can enjoy the land, which was purchased by him vide sale deeds Ex.P2 and Ex.P3 without any interference, but this was not discussed by the Ld. Addl. Civil Judge (Sr.Division), Gurdaspur in the impugned order. The case file reveals that Civil Suit was earlier filed by the present appellants against Anant ram, who was father of the respondents-plaintiffs. The said suit filed by the present appellants was dismissed on 15.10.1997. A perusal of the sale deed shows that Anant Ram, father of the plaintiffs purchased plot having passage of 1½ karam wide on the eastern side. No doubt this passage is also shown in the sale deed dated 24.5.1990, vide which the appellants claimed to have purchased plot from the same C.R. No. 6757 of 2007 -3- vendor Jog Raj. It is evident that there exists passage of 1½ karam in the plot of the plaintiffs and the defendants have no right to encroach upon the same. So far as order dated 11.7.2001 passed by Hon'ble Mr.Justice R.L.Anand is concerned, it shows that the appeal filed by the present appellants was dismissed as no merit was found in their appeal. Had there been any merit in the appeal, the Hon'ble High Court must have allowed the appeal and up-set the findings of both the courts below. Simply observing that the present appellants can enjoy the land purchased by them does not mean that the appellants cannot be restrained from encroaching upon or obstructing the respondents from using the passage.” After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the file, this Court is of the opinion that there is no illegality or perversity in the orders passed by the courts below which may warrant interference by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, there is no merit in this revision petition and the same is hereby dismissed. Nothing observed in this order shall be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. October 13, 2009 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE