Mahendra Dayal, J. - (1.) The instant civil revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been filed against the judgment and order dated 12.03.2015 passed by the learned District Judge, Shravasti in Misc. Appeal No.8 of 2015, whereby the learned District Judge has allowed the appeal and has directed the parties to maintain status quo in respect of the property in question till final disposal of the suit.
(2.) The facts in brief are that the opposite parties No.1 and 2 filed a suit for permanent injunction against the revisionists in which an application for interim injunction was also moved under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC. By the order dated 06.03.2014, the learned Civil Judge passed an order for issuance of notice to the revisionists and invited objections from them. Simultaneously an order was also passed directing the parties to maintain status quo in respect of the property in question which was shown with the letters A, B, C, D in the site plan annexed with the plaint. In pursuance of the notice issued to the revisionists, they appeared before the court below and filed their objections. The learned Civil Judge by the order dated 13.01.2015 dismissed the application for interim injunction on the ground that the opposite parties No.1 and 2 have failed to establish that they were owners in possession of the property in question.
(3.) Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the opposite parties No.1 and 2 preferred an appeal before the learned District Judge Shravasti, who after hearing the parties and on perusal of the record allowed the appeal and directed the parties to maintain status quo. It was also provided that without permission of the Court none of the parties shall raise any permanent structure. With regard to the trees standing on the disputed land, it was also provided that none of the parties shall cut the trees till the pendency of the suit.;