Sudhir Narain - (1.) THE present writ petition has been directed against the order dated 4th May 1989, passed by the District Judge, Ballia.
(2.) THE facts in brief are that the petitioner filed suit no. 660/87 for injunction restraining the defendant, the respondent no. 2 from demolishing the wall of her house shown by digits 1-2-3-4 in the site plan given at the foot of the plains and from dispossessing her from the house in dispute or from interfering with her peaceful possession over it, in any manner whatsoever. Her case was that her father Algoo Misra allas Laxmi Narain had executed a will on 26-4-1959 bequeathing his properties in her favour. Subsequently,, he executed a registered gift deed on 10-1-1960 in her favour and his grandson, regarding the house in question. THE defendant's house was situate towards north to her disputed house. He was an employee in Police Department and with the help of some unsocial elements he was threatening to enter Into possession over the disputed house by force. THE suit was filed on 11-12-1987 and on the same date the plaintiff filed application for temparary injuaction for restraining the defendant from demolishing the disputed wall shown by digits 3-4 in the plaint-map. THE application was allowed by the trial court and temporary injunction was granted restraining the defendant from making constructions till 3-2-1988. An Amin of the court was directed to prepare the map and submit report THE amin Prepared report and map its which disputed wall was shown in existence, he defendant on 3-2-1988 filed objection (14-C 2) against the injunction application and he also filed written statement. In the objection he denied the existence of the wall shown by digits 3- 4 in the foot of the plaint map. He also filed written statement and denied the plaint allegations stating that the house belonged to one Ram Sunder Misra and after his death his widow Smt, Ram Dulari came into possession She Executed a registered will in his favour on 10-11-1981. After her death, the defendant became owner of the house on the basis of the will. On 24 2-1988, he filed objection (26/2) against the report, of the Amin and it was stated that he wrongly had shown the existence of the wall. On 9-3-1988 the plaintiff sought amendment in the relief clause of the plaint praying that the wall in existence or any other wall be not demolished by the defendant On 13-3-1988. the plaintiff moved an application (31/C-2) alleging that the defendants in violation of the Court's injunction order demolished the wall shown by digits 3-4 in the plaint map and opened a new door in the wall of his house with a view to encroach upon the courtyard of the plaintiff. She, accordingly, prayed that the defendant be ordered to re-elect the well shown by digits 3-4 and close the door which the defendant had opened in the wall.
(3.) THE defendant filed objection and denied that the door was opened by him. He alleged that the door was very old. He denied that any wall, as alleged by the plaintiff, shown by digits 3-4 was ever in existence and there was no question of Ms demolishing such wail. The learned Munsif allowed the application and directed the defendant to re-erect the wall shown by digits 3-4 within one month and to close the new door during that period. The defendant filed revision against the said order before the District Judge who allowed the revision and set aside the order of the Munsif by his order dated 4th May, 1989. The petitioner has challenged this order.;