K.S.SIDHU, J. - (1.) THIS petition of revision under Section 115 CPC has arisen in the following circumstances.
(2.) MALIRAM , the respondent herein,, filed a suit for perpetual injunction against Surjaram and others, the petitioners herein, restraining them from causing any obstruction in the streets leading to his house and in the Rasta in front of his house. On an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC made by the plaintiff, the trial court made an order, dated November 26, 1969 granting an ad -interim injunction in these words: After hearing the counsel for the plaintiff, an ad -interim injunction is hereby issued restraining the defendants from making any obstruction in the streets leading to the house of the plaintiff and in the Rasta infront of his house. The defendants are directed to appear in the Court on December 17, 1969 and show cause as to why this ad interim injunction be not confirmed. On December 17, 1969, the plaintiff made an application under Order 39 Rule 2(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 before its amendment by the Amendment Act No. 104 of 1976, complaining that the defendants had raised construction at the Western end of the street and thereby closed it on December 14, 1969. The plaintiff prayed that the defendants should be punished for disobedience of the ad -interim injunction issued by the Court The defendants entered appearance and contested the said application. They denied that they had erected any construction in any of the streets on December 14,1969. They added in this context that whatever construction they had made at the spot had been completed by them by November 16, 1969.
(3.) AFTER recording evidence of both sides, the trial Court made an order, dated August 6, 1975 holding that the defendants Surja Ram, Ram Kumar, Harphool, Malaram and Sagar Singh are guilty of disobedience of the order of this Court dated November 26, 1969, in that as the trial Court put it, 'it is established that the defendants had disobeyed the Court's order directing the status quo to be observed'. Consequently, the trial Court directed that all the aforementioned five persons be detained in civil prison for the period of 15 days.;