VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Himachal Pradesh High Court 2026 › High Court of Himachal Pradesh

Karam Chand and Another v. Onkar Dass

Disposed Off
Court
High Court of Himachal Pradesh
Decided
18 September 2026
Bench
Virender Singhauthor
Case no.
CMPMO 50/2026

Follow Himachal Pradesh High CourtFollow Virender Singh

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CMPMO No.  : 50 of 2026 a/w CMPMO No.  :  51 of 2026 Decided on    : 18.09.2026

(1) CMPMO No. 50 of 2026 Karam Chand & Anr. ...Petitioners. Versus Onkar Dass

…Respondent

(2) CMPMO No. 51 of 2026 Karam Chand & Anr. ...Petitioners. Versus Onkar Dass

…Respondent The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : Mr. Mukul Sood & Mr. Vivek Thakur, Advocates. For the respondent : Mr.   Animesh   Pathak,

Advocate. Virender Singh, Judge

(Oral) Both these above titled petitions, which, have been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, are being disposed of by the common order.

¶2By   way   of   CMPMO   No.   50   of   2026,   the petitioners   have   assailed   the   order   dated   23.09.2025, passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Una, District Una, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as 'the first 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. appellate Court'),  in Civil Misc. Appeal  No. 29 of 2025, titled as "Karam Chand & Anr. Versus Onkar Dass".   By way of order dated 23.09.2025, the learned first appellate Court has affirmed the order dated 18.06.2025, passed by the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge, Una, District Una H.P. (hereinafter referred to as 'the learned trial Court'), in CMA No. 738­VI/2022, by virtue of which, the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, filed by the petitioners, in the counter claim, has been ordered to be dismissed.

¶3By way of CMPMO No. 51 of 2026, the petitioners   have   assailed   the   order   dated   23.09.2025, passed by the learned first appellate Court, in Civil Misc. Appeal   No.   25   of   2025,   affirming   the   order   dated

20.05.2025, passed by the learned trial Court, in CMA No. 697­VI/2022, by virtue of which, application under Order 39   Rules   1   and   2   CPC,   filed   by   the   respondent,   was ordered to be allowed.

¶4For   the   sake   of   convenience,   parties   to   the present  lis,  are,   hereinafter   referred   to,   in   the   same manner, as were, referred to, by the learned trial Court.

¶5Brief facts, leading to the filing of the present petition before this Court, as borne out from the record, may be summed up, as under:­

5.1 Plaintiff Onkar Dass, filed a suit for permanent prohibitory   injunction   restraining   the   defendants   from causing   any   sort   of   interference   and   dig   out   the foundations, encroachment by way of raising any sort of construction otherwise and ousting the plaintiff from land measuring 583­47 Sq. Decimeters, comprised of Khewat No. 555, Khatauni No. 1222, 1223, bearing Khasra Nos. 1420, 1428, 1429, as entered in the jamabandi for the year 2015­16, situated in Up Mohal Galua (Una), Tehsil and District Una, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as 'the suit land'), and   in   the   alternative,   suit   for   mandatory   injunction directing the defendants to remove the malba or any super structure, if so raised, over any portion of the suit land.

¶6Along with the suit, application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, has also been filed.

¶7When put to notice, the suit has been contested by the defendants, taking preliminary objections that the suit is not maintainable, the plaintiff has not approached the Court with clean hands, suit is barred by the principle of res judicata in view of earlier judgment and decree dated

01.11.2006, in Civil Suit No. 35/1990 titled "Tarlok Singh Vs Jarnail Singh", suit is barred under Order 2 Rule 2 CPC, suit is bad for non­joinder of necessary parties and suit is barred by limitation.

¶8Along   with   the   written   statement,   defendants have also filed the counter claim, seeking the decree for declaration,   to   the   effect   that   land   measuring   104­88 Sq.mtrs Hects. comprised of Khasra No. 1428, 1429 and part of Khasra No. 1420, Khewat No. 555, Khatauni No. 1222, 1223, as entered in jamabandi for the year 2015­16, situated in Up Mohal Galua, Tehsil and District Una, H.P. denoted   by   letters   ABCDEFGH,   is   in   possession   of   the counter claimant for the last more than 30 years and the same   has   ripened   in   ownership   by   way   of   adverse possession.

¶9Along with the counter claim, defendants have also filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, seeking interim relief to restrain the plaintiff to take forcible possession or raise any sort of construction over the land measuring 104­88 Sq.mtrs Hects. Comprised of Khasra No. 1428, 1429 and part of Khasra No. 1420, as discussed above.

¶10Interestingly, the learned trial Court, instead of deciding both the applications, filed by plaintiff, as well as, the counter claimants, under the provisions of Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, by way of the common order, has decided the same separately, as the application filed by the plaintiff Onkar Dass, was decided on 20.05.2025, and the application filed by the defendants under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, in the counter claim, has been decided by the learned trial Court on 18.06.2025.

¶11The learned trial  Court  has allowed the application   preferred   by   the   plaintiff,   whereby   the application moved by the defendants under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, in the counter claim,  was  ordered to  be dismissed.

¶12The learned first appellate Court has fallen into error by deciding both the appeals, without considering the above facts.

¶13In   view   of   the   above,   when   both   the applications, which, have been filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, i.e. one filed by the plaintiff in his suit and other filed by the defendants, in their counter claim, were required   to   be   decided   by   the   learned   trial   Court simultaneously, by the common order, discussing the rival contentions of the parties.

¶14On this score, the present petitions are allowed, by setting aside the orders passed by learned trial Court dated  18.06.2025  and  20.05.2025,  passed  in  the  above applications,   as   upheld   by   the   learned   first   appellate Court, and matter is remanded back to the learned trial Court,   to   decide   the   above   applications,   by   a   common order.  The entire exercise be done within a period of ten days, from the date of appearance of the parties, before the learned trial Court.

¶15Parties   through   their   counsel   are   directed   to appear before the learned trial Court on 28.09.2026.

¶16Record be sent back immediately.

(Virender Singh) Judge 18th September, 2026 (Pramod Kumar)

Source: High Court of Himachal Pradesh, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.