IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CMPMO No.408 of 2020 Decided on 12th August, 2025 Ram Lal …Petitioner Versus Mohan Singh …Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Ms. Madhurika Sekhon Verma, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Ranvir Chauhan, Advocate. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:- “it is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this petitioner may very kindly be allowed and the judgment dated 09.10.2020 passed by the learned Additional District Judge-II, Shimla in Civil Appeal No.55 of 2020, whereby the Appeal filed by the respondent has been allowed may kindly be set aside and affirm the order dated 14.08.2020 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division) Court No.11, Rohru, District Shimla in CMA No.33-6 of 2020 in Civil Suit No.52 of 2020 by allowing the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC filed by the petitioner in the interest of justice.” 2. The petitioner, who is the plaintiff has filed a Civil Suit for permanent prohibitory and mandatory injunction against the 2 respondent/defendant. In an application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, learned Trial Court on 14.08.2020 ordered status quo. This order was assailed by the defendant by way of an appeal and the Appellate Court in terms of order dated 14.08.2020, set aside the order passed by the learned Trial Court by inter alia holding that before the learned Trial Court itself a Local Commissioner was appointed to demarcate the land and in terms of the report of the demarcation, no encroachment was found of the defendant upon the property of the plaintiff. 3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties as it could not be demonstrated that the findings so arrived at by the learned Appellate Court were perverse and not borne out from the record of the case, these proceedings are closed, but with the observation that whatever construction has been carried out or may be carried out by the defendant upon the property in dispute shall abide by the final decision of the Civil Suit and the parties shall not claim any equity. Interim order stands vacated. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge August 12, 2025 (Vinod)