AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R.S. Garg, J.
Heard on the question of admission.
Along with the suit seeking an injunction in relation to land Survey No. 555/4 the plaintiff filed an application for grant of ad interim injunction. In reply to the said application the defendants submitted before the Court that the railway line was not led on any part of Survey No. 555/4 nor they are disturbing the possession of the plaintiff over land Survey No. 555/4. At the request of the parties a Commissioner for inspecting the spot was appointed. The said Commissioner/Tahsildar vide his report dated 19.10.2000 submitted to the Court that out of total area of Survey No. 555/4 about 286 sq.ft. of land has already been occupied by the defendants. From the suit it does not appear that present is a suit for possession of that area over which the defendants have made any encroachment.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the defendants may dispossess the plaintiff any moment, therefore, his possession deserves to be deducted.
After going through the order passed by the Court below and the documents annexed with the present appeal, I am unable to hold that the order passed by the Court below is bad or is contrary to law. The moment the defendants have made statement before the lower Court that they are not using the land Survey No. 555/4 nor were making any trespass over it then such statement of the defendants would bring an end to the matter.
The plaintiff is free to take the suitable steps for obtaining the possession of 286 sq. ft. of land but at this stage it cannot be said that despite the statement of the defendants that they are not interfering with the possession of the plaintiff, this Court must interfere. I find no reason to interfere.
The appeal is dismissed.