2025:UHC:4296 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition Misc. Single No. 1252 of 2025 22 May, 2025 Kulwant Kaur and another --Petitioners Versus Gurdayal Singh Saini and another --Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Presence:- Mr. Bhupesh Kandpal, learned counsel for the petitioner. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ JUDGMENT Petitioners are plaintiffs in Civil Suit No. 08 of 2025. They have challenged the order dated 07.04.2025 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, whereby their application under Section 151 CPC for interim relief was rejected. In the said application, petitioners had prayed that defendant be restrained from interfering with their operations over the property in question. 2. This Court does not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. Learned Trial Court has considered the fact that petitioners filed suit under Section 209 of Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 for eviction of the defendant, which implies that petitioners admitted possession of the defendant. In such view of the matter, learned Trial Court was 1 2025:UHC:4296 justified in inferring that petitioners are not in possession, therefore, the interim relief, which petitioners sought by their application under Section 151 CPC was rightly denied. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon a judgment rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 13001 of 2024 (Ramakant Ambalal Choksi v. Harish Ambalal Choksi). 4. The facts of the said case are entirely different, therefore, it do not help the petitioners. Petitioners had not sought direction to the defendant not to create third party interest over the said property, and they wanted Court order for getting possession over the property. 5. Even otherwise also, the order passed by learned Trial Court is discretionary in nature, therefore, this Court do not find any good ground to interfere in the matter. 6. Thus, there is no scope for interference with the impugned order, passed by learned Trial Court. The writ petition fails and is dismissed. ________________________ MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J. Navin 2