AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Mr. K. Paul, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. R. Colney learned GA for the respondents No. 1 to 3 and Mr. B. Laitmon, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this application under Article 226 has been preferred and filed before this Court seeking urgent relief in view of the unavailability of the Civil Courts which are on vacation. The case of the petitioner is that, while an application has been filed and is pending under Section 151 with a prayer to restrain the respondent No. 4 from carrying out any construction or renovation in the suit premises, the same is being done by the respondent so as to frustrate the said proceedings. As such, he prays for appropriate interim protection or till the Misc. application is heard by the Trial Court and dispose of.
Mr. B. Laitmon, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4 who has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent No. 4 submits that the construction as alleged is only some renovation works which has been carried out in the roof and the allegations that large scale construction is being carried out is not correct.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
In the interest of justice and in view of the fact that the Civil Court is closed and to avoid any further complications or any other proceedings, it is directed that the respondent No. 4 shall not cause any further construction or renovation within the suit premises until the Misc. Case No. 124 of 209 arising out of the Title Suit No. 26 (T) 2019 pending before the Court of the Assistant to Deputy Commissioner, Shillong is heard and finally disposed of. The learned trial Court is also directed to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 3(three) weeks after opening.
The writ petition is accordingly closed.