Surya Kant, J. - (1.) This revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the defendant against whom an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 Civil Procedure Code for the grant of ad-interim injunction was dismissed by the trial court but has been allowed by the first appellate court thereby restraining him from raising further construction and/or to change the nature of the suit land which is stated to be jointly owned by the parties along with other co-sharers.
(2.) As per the petitioner's case, he purchased 5 bighas, 3 biswas and 5 biswansis of land from Smt. Piar Kaur, comprised in khasra No. 421, Khata No. 59, Khatauni No.147, 153, 156 and 158 situated in the revenue estate of village Ratolan, Tehsil Malerkotla. According to the petitioner, earlier the vendor Smt. Piar Kaur had been and now he is in exclusive possession of the aforesaid khasra number. It is also contended that in January, 2005 Satnam Singh (minor) - respondent No.1 is alleged to have purchased a piece of land from his father through a sham transaction and thereafter filed the suit for injunction in February, 2005 on the plea that he is a co-sharer.
(3.) Learned trial court dismissed the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 Civil Procedure primarily on the ground that as per the report of the local commissioner, the petitioner has been found in exclusive possession of the piece of the land which he purchased from Smt. Piar Kaur. Without disturbing that finding of fact, the learned first appellate court, however, has restrained the petitioner from raising further construction over the said piece of land on the ground that the land in question is in 'joint khata' in relation to which the partition proceedings are already pending, therefore, the petitioner cannot be permitted to change the nature of the suit land till the partition takes place.;