2025:HHC:33291 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CMPMO No. 22 of 2023 Decided on : 22.09.2025 Sharwan Kumar …Petitioner Versus Smt. Sagari Devi …Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Sanjeev Sood, Advocate. For the respondent : None. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) When this case was listed on 14.03.2023, the respondent was represented by Mr. Parikshit, learned counsel. Thereafter, when the case was listed on 18.09.2025, none appeared for the respondent and in the interest of justice, the case was ordered to be listed for 22.09.2025. Today, despite repeated calls none has put in appearance for the respondent. Accordingly, respondent is ordered to be proceeded against exparte. 2. By way of this petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, 1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:33291 prayed for the following reliefs:- “The petitioner, therefore, prays that this Hon’ble Court in the exercise of visitorial and supervisory jurisdiction may be pleased to call for the records of the case and after examining the legality and proprietary proceedings may be pleased to set aside the orders Annexure P-7 & P-9. Such other Orders which this Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner. ” 3. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 22.04.2022, passed by learned Senior Civil Judge, Kinnaur at Reckong Peo, in CMA No. 92 of 2022 and order dated 22.10.2022, passed by learned District Judge, Kinnaur, Civil Division at Rampur Bushahr, in terms whereof, the application filed by the respondent herein along-with suit, under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘CPC’) was allowed and appeal filed by the petitioner herein against the said order, was dismissed. 4. Perusal of the record of this case demonstrates that when the case was listed on 10.01.2023, the following order 3 2025:HHC:33291 was passed by this Court:- “CMP No. 468 of 2023. Notice in the aforesaid terms. Petitioner by way of instant application, has prayed for staying the operation of orders Annexure P-7 passed by learned Senior Civil Judge, Kinnaur at Reckong Peo in CMA bearing registration No. 16/2022, on 22.04.2022 and Annexure P-9, passed by learned District Judge, Kinnaur Civil Division at Rampur Bushahr, in Civil Msc. Appeal No. 6 of 2022, whereby the petitioner herein has been restrained from causing any sort of interference by raising wall over the suit land comprised in Khata/Khatauni No. 36 min/62 mn, Khasra No.357, Kita 2, measuring 00-08-69 hectares, situated at Up- Muhal Surcho, Tehsil Nichar, District Kinnaur, H.P. till the final disposal of the suit. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed on record a copy of plaint of a suit filed by the respondent herein against the petitioner on earlier occasion, whereby a decree of possession was sought in respect of the same land which is the subject matter of list in the present case. He has further placed on record copies of documents, which reveal that the suit so filed on earlier 4 2025:HHC:33291 occasion by the respondent herein was withdrawn without seeking any leave to file fresh. On the strength of the admission made in earlier suit as to the possession of petitioner herein on the land in question, prayer has been made to stay the orders Annexures P-7 and P-9 passed by the learned Courts below. It has been contended that in case the said orders are not stayed, the petitioner shall be dispossessed under the garb of such orders and in such event he will be put to irreparable loss and injury. Applicant has been able to make out prima facie case. In case the relief as prayed by him in interim is not granted, there is every likelihood of petitioner being put to irreparable loss and injury besides being led to multiplicity of litigation. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, pending notice to the respondent in the instant application, the operation of orders Annexure P-7 passed by learned Senior Civil Judge, Kinnaur at Reckong Peo in CMA bearing registration No. 16/2022, on 22.04.2022 and Annexure P-9, passed by learned District Judge, Kinnaur Civil Division at Rampur Bushahr, in Civil Msc. Appeal No. 6 of 2022 shall remain stayed and the parties shall maintain status quo qua nature and possession of 5 2025:HHC:33291 the suit land.” 5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the orders under challenge, this Court is of the considered view that indeed the orders under challenge are not sustainable in light of the findings, which already stand returned by this Court in its order dated 10.01.2023, which stands quoted hereinabove. 6. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. Order dated 22.04.2022, passed by learned Senior Civil Judge, Kinnaur at Reckong Peo, in CMA No. 92 of 2022 and Order dated 22.10.2022, passed by learned District Judge, Kinnaur, Civil Division at Rampur Bushahr, are quashed and set aside and it is ordered that parties shall maintain status quo qua nature and possession of the suit land during the pendency of the suit. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge September 22, 2025 (Shivank Thakur)