- (1.) The petitioners have challenged order dated 03.05.2012, granting status quo, on an application filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (here-in-after referred to as the "CPC") by the respondent regarding land falling in khasra nos.42//14/1 (2-11) and 13/1/2 (0-16) and the order dated 13.11.2013 dismissing the appeal of the petitioners maintaining the order of status quo passed by the trial Court.
(2.) In short, land measuring 85 kanal 6 marlas, situated in the revenue estate of village Bhatnura Lobana, Tehsil and District Jalandhar was ancestral property of the parties to the dispute and their brother Dhian Singh, earlier held by Mohinder Singh as a Karta in which they were all interested to the extent of 1/4th share each. The respondent filed Civil Suit No.95 of 2005 for declaration against his brothers and father alleging that he is a co-owner to the extent of 1/4th share in the suit land. The said suit was initially contested by all the defendants therein but lateron it was compromised and joint khata was partitioned on the basis of compromise dated 27.05.2006. A compromise decree was passed which has become final between the parties. According to the petitioners, the following are the relevant paragraph of the compromise:- "2. That out of the said remaining land measuring 84K-8M land measuring 104 Sq. Karams or say 11-1/2 Marlas (i.e. 10+10+10+22=52x2=104) is left by the parties as a common passage i.e. beyond the Panchayat passage along the southern side of Khasra No.14/1, and then around the plot of Swaran Singh etc. on its eastern then northern and then western side and then along the southern abutment of khasra no.13/1 upto khasra no.12 and the Aarh shall also be provided alongwith the Rasta which shall remain the joint property of the parties and they all shall have the right to use the same as passage without any obstruction by any of the other parties to this compromise.
(3.) That thus out of the remaining land measuring 83K-16-1/2M (i.e. 84K-9M-11-1/2M passage) Shri Nazar Singh, party of the first part, is allotted and given 20K- 19M land of his 1/4th share i.e. land constituting Khasra Nos.42//6/2 (4-3), 7/2(1-18), 26(9-11), 19/1(3-9), 20/1 (4-7), 1/2 share i.e. land measuring 4 Kanals out of Khasra Nos.49//2/1 (0-9) and 21/2 (7-11), and land measuring 2K-11M out of Khasra No.42//12 (8-0) towards its southern side so as to connect the same with the said passage in the east and Khasra No.19/1 and 20/1 towards the south-west i.e. into land measuring 20K-19M, while the remainder of the said land measuring 32K-17-1/2M shall remain as the absolute and exclusive property of the parties of the second and third part namely Mohinder Singh, Chanan Singh and Dhian Singh in equal shares and they shall have a right to hire or fire the same they or anyone of them likes to the exclusion of said Nazar Singh, who having separated, shall ceased to be a member of the joint Hindu family/coparcenary from today." 3. It is alleged that as per para 2 of the compromise read with the extract of the field map Annexure P-3/A, the passage/Aarh (water course) 52x2 sq. karams was left beyond the Panchayat passage which goes from east to west along the disputed land forming khasra no.42//14/1 (2-11) and 13/1/2 (0-16) starting only from the south-eastern corner of the adjoining plot of Sawarn Singh etc. i.e. 10 karams on its eastern side, 10 karams on northern side, 10 karams on its western side and then upto the length of 22 karams along the southern abutment of khasra no.13/1 upto khasra no.12 as their common property for the use of all of them. There was no passage/Aarh (water course) left out of khasra nos.42//14/1 (2-11) and 13/1/2 (0-16) which has fallen to the share of petitioner no.1 Chanan Singh and others and the respondent has no interest whatsoever in it. Counsel for the petitioners has also referred to para 7 of the compromise, which reads as follows:- "7. That a 4" tube-well bore, operated with the help of 5 HP electric motor, was/is being used jointly and in common by Nazar Singh, Mohinder Singh, parties of the first and second part, and Dhian Singh one of the parties of the third part, in equal shares. As the portion of the land on which this tube-well is installed has fallen to the share of land and is under the exclusive possession of said Dhian Singh, so they shall get the price of this tubewell assessed from at least three independent/competent persons, and if the price is acceptable, any of the 3 parties can purchase at the said rate the other two shares and if the rate is not acceptable then who-so-ever will give the highest amount shall become the owner of the electric tube-well connection alongwith motor and accessories. This is done to settle every type of dispute between the parties so that nothing untoward remains pending between them to become source of fresh dispute.";