CR-7454-2025 (O&M)
Sr. No.143 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR-7454-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 06th April 2026 DR. A.S. BAWA AND ANOTHER .....…Petitioners versus BIKRAMJEET SINGH SABHERWAL AND ANOTHER ........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN Present: Mr. Saurav Bhatia, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. K.D.S. Hooda, Advocate with Mr. Sumit Ruhal, Advocate, for the respondents. HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN, J. (ORAL) 1. The present Civil Revision has been filed impugning the order dated 17.09.2025 (Annexure P-4), whereby, the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh, has dismissed the application filed by the petitioners- defendants under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. 2. As per the brief facts, the respondents-plaintiffs filed a suit seeking permanent injunction (Annexure P-1) restraining the petitioner- defendants qua the property bearing House No.1513, Ground Floor, Sector 43-B, Chandigarh. It is not disputed that Mr. Dalip Singh, father of petitioner No.2-Minu Bawa and respondent No.1-Bikramjeet Singh Sabherwal, was the owner of the said property at the time of filing of the Suit. SIMRANDEEP KAUR 2026.04.08 09:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-7454-2025 (O&M)  3. An application under Order 7 Rule 11 was filed by the defendants on the ground that the suit is not maintainable as the plaintiffs are not owners-in-possession and that the suit does not disclose any cause of action. 4. There is change of circumstances. Mr. Dalip Singh has expired on 13.02.2026 during the pendency of the present petition. 5. One of the grounds taken by the petitioners was that the suit is not maintainable as the plaintiffs were not owners-in-possession at the time of filing of the Suit. Both the plainttif-Bikramjeet Singh and defendant- Minu Bawa are the Class-I heirs of the said owner Mr. Dalip Singh. 6. Since Dalip Singh has expired, as such, due to change of circumstances, deciding the present Civil Revision on merits will be only for academic purpose. 7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, no further discussion on merits is required to be made by this Court, since the civil suit is still pending before the trial Court; even an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC is yet to be decided. Due to change of circumstances, the question of inheritance is involved, to which the parties have appropriate remedy to avail. 7. As such, the present Civil Revision is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. The petitioner shall have liberty to approach the trial Court by way of filing an application seeking appropriate remedy as per law in view of change of circumstances. 8. Needless to say that the above observations may not be construed as an expression of opinion on merits of the controversy. SIMRANDEEP KAUR 2026.04.08 09:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-7454-2025 (O&M)  9. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of. (HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN) JUDGE 06th April 2026 simran Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SIMRANDEEP KAUR 2026.04.08 09:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document