Prakash Tatia, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE appellant is aggrieved against the order dt. 08.10.2007 passed by the Court of Additional District Judge, Raisinghnagar. According to the appellant/plaintiff, the trial Court without deciding the question of actual physical possession passed the order to maintain status quo. It is submitted that the appellant is in possession of the property.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the respondent/defendant submitted that if the appellant's case is that she is in possession of the property and the trial Court has only ordered to maintain status quo, then she cannot have any grievance. However, learned Counsel for the respondent also submitted that the respondent is in possession of the property in dispute.;