Shiv Narayan Jaiswal Dead And 2 Others vs Dinesh Kumar Jaiswal And 15 Others

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants/defendants and learned counsel for the respondents/plaintiffs. Perused the record.

2. Learned counsel for the parties admit that a dispute exists between the landlord and tenant. The appellants/defendants are the owners, and respondent no. 1/defendant no. 1 is the tenant.

3. Upon perusal of the record, it appears that Original Suit No. 34 of 2022 was filed by the plaintiff/respondent no. 1 seeking a decree of permanent injunction, whereby the defendants, along with their agents and colluding associates, be restrained from obstructing the access route situated to the west of the plaintiff's Shyam Charitable Hospital, and from forcibly dispossessing the plaintiff of, or taking forcible possession of, the plaintiff's medical store (Jaiswal Medical Store) and hospital (Shyam Charitable Hospital).

4. It is further evident that the respondents/plaintiffs are also claiming adverse possession over the property in question, whereas the suit as instituted is for permanent injunction only.

5. SCC Suit No. 4 of 2022 between the parties is also pending before the learned Additional District Judge (POCSO-III), Allahabad.

6. In matters relating to landlord-tenant disputes, the appropriate forum is the Court of Small Causes (JCC Court), and the aforesaid SCC Suit is already pending before the competent court of law. However, Application 6-G filed by respondent no. 1 has been allowed, and the parties have been directed to maintain status quo with respect to the disputed property, namely Arazi No. 1041, area 0.1890 hectare, situated at Mauza Koraon, Tehsil Koraon, District Prayagraj, particularly the portion comprising the medical store "Jaiswal Medical Store" and hospital "Shyam Charitable Hospital," constructed over an area measuring 15 100 feet, with a further direction that no alteration shall be made therein, vide order dated 15.01.2025.

7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is directed that respondent no. 1 shall not be dispossessed except in accordance with due process of law.

8. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 15.01.2025 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division, Court No. 14, Prayagraj is modified to the extent indicated above.

9. The present FAFO is disposed of accordingly.

10. Let the original record be returned to the learned Trial Court forthwith.

(Abdul Shahid,J.)

May 6, 2026

M. Tarik