J.V. Gupta, J. - (1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order of the trial Court dated May 8, 1985, whereby the preliminary issue as regards the territorial jurisdiction of the Court to try the suit was decided in favour of the Plaintiffs.
(2.) THE Plaintiffs filed the suit for the grant of the mandatory injunction directing Defendant Parkash Chand to deliver back possession of the single shop double storeyed etc. situated at Malout Tehsil. Ludhiana, and for the recovery of Rs. 1,800/ - as interest and damages for using the said shop. According to the Defendant, since the shop, in dispute, is situated at Malout in District Ludhiana, the suit could be instituted in the Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the property is situated, i.e., in the Court in District Ludhiana only, and the Court at Malerkotla in District Sangrur has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit in view of the provisions of Section 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure, (hereinafter called the Code). Without going into the merits of the controversy between the parties, I do not find any justification to interfere with the impugned order in the exercise of the powers under Section 115 of the Code The learned Counsel for the Petitioner was unable to show as to what prejudice was caused to the Defendant in case the impugned order was allowed to stand, when admittedly his client is residing at Ahmedgarh within the jurisdiction of the Court. Section 115 of the Code inter alia provides that the High Court shall not vary or reverse any order or any order deciding an issue except where the order, if allowed to stand, would occasion failure of justice or cause irreparable injury to the party against whom it was made. In the absence of any prejudice or failure of justice to the Defendant, no interference is called for.
(3.) CONSEQUENTLY , this revision petition fails and is dismissed with costs. The parties have been directed to appear in the trial Court on November 12, 1986, for further proceedings. It is further directed that in order to expediate the hearing of the suit, the parties will produce their entire evidence at their own responsibility. However, dasti summonses may be given if so desired, as provided under Order XVI Rule 7 -A of the Code.;