IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.502 of 2024 Decided on: 27.02.2026 Bisheshwar Lal ….Petitioner Versus Partap Chand & others ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr. B.S. Attri and Mr. Ashish Verma, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr. Surinder Saklani, Advocate. Romesh Verma, Judge (Oral) The present petition arises out of order dated 13.08.2024, as passed by Senior Civil Judge, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P., whereby the application filed by the petitioner for grant of police assistance has been ordered to be dismissed. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner/plaintiff filed a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction against the respondents/defendants on the ground that the suit land is joint inter se the parties and without partitioning the same, the respondents/defendants are trying to encroach and utilize the best valuable portion of the suit 2 land and they should be restrained from changing the the nature of the suit land till the suit land is partitioned. Along with the suit, the petitioner filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of CPC for grant of ad interim injunction. 3. The respondents/defendants filed written statement to the plaint and reply to the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, whereby all the averments and contentions, as raised by the plaintiff/petitioner, have been refuted. Learned Senior Civil Judge, Palampur, District Kangra, vide its order dated 15.07.2024 allowed the application filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of CPC and while concluding, passed the operative order, which reads as under: “7. In view of discussion made above, it would the appropriate and in the interest of justice to direct the parties to suit to maintain status quo qua nature, possession and alienation of vacant portion of suit land and not to obstruct stairs of old house on spot till suit land is partitioned by metes and bounds or suit is decided on merits. Accordingly, parties are directed to maintain status quo qua nature, possession and alienation of the suit land and not to obstruct stairs of old house on spot till the suit is decided on merits of suit land is partitioned by metes and bounds.” 3 4. The petitioner/plaintiff submits that despite passing of the order in application filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of CPC, the respondents/defendants are interfering in the suit land and flouting the Court order, which has been passed by learned trial Court and for that purpose he had filed an application before Counsellor, Ward No.14, Municipal Corporation, Palampur, who on visiting the spot, found that the construction work is going on on the spot. He further submits that in case order of injunction passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge dated 15th July, 2024 is not implemented through means of police assistance the very purpose of filing the suit shall be defeated. 5. Mr. Surinder Saklani, learned counsel for the respondents/defendants, has defended the order dated 13.08.2024, as passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Palampur, whereby the application filed by the petitioner for grant of police assistance has been dismissed. 6. From the perusal of the order as passed by learned Senior Civil Judge, Palampur, dated 15.07.2024, it emanates that the order of injunction is quite confusing and vague. In the first portion of the said order, learned Senior 4 Civil Judge, Palampur has stated that the parties shall maintain status quo qua the nature, possession and alienation of the vacant portion of the suit land. In the second portion the learned trial Court has held that the parties are directed to maintain status quo qua nature, possession and alienation of the suit land. 7. It is contented by Mr. Surinder Saklani, learned counsel for the respondents/defendants, that the status quo is only with respect to the vacant portion of the suit land and stairs and the respondents are raising the construction over the already existing structure. On the other hand, Mr. B.S. Attri, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that status quo is qua the whole suit land. 8. Therefore, this Court deems fit that the order of Civil Judge requires clarification. Accordingly, learned Senior Civil Judge, Palampur, is directed to pass a fresh order clarifying the order of status quo dated 15.07.2024 and thereafter, in case the plaintiff/petitioner still feels aggrieved he can file a fresh application for grant of police assistance, if need arises and the learned Senior Civil Judge may proceed in the matter, in accordance with law. 5 9. With these observations, the present petition stands disposed of. Parties are directed to remain present before the learned trial Court, on 10th March, 2026. 10. Needless to say that no fresh notice shall be issued by learned trial Court and the parties shall remain present before it on the said date. ( Romesh Verma ) Judge February 27, 2026 (vt)