Back
VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO
Buraga Guruswamy Das Died Per Lrs – Appellant
Versus
Buraga Rajendrudu – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
This second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (“C.P.C.” for short) is filed aggrieved against the Judgment and decree, dated 05.03.2014 in A.S.No.10 of 2012, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Puttur, reversing the Judgment and decree, dated 05.03.2012 in O.S.No.233 of 2006, on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Puttur.
2. The appellants 1 and 2 herein are the defendants and the respondent herein is the plaintiff in O.S.No.233 of 2006, on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Puttur. It is to be here that the appellants 1 and 2 herein died during the pendency of this appeal and their legal representatives are brought on record as appellants 3 to 6 and 7 to 9 respectively.
3. The plaintiff initiated action in O.S.No.233 of 2006, on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Puttur, with a prayer for permanent injunction restraining the defendants and their men from ever interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of plaint schedule property and for costs.
4. The learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Puttur, dismissed the suit without costs. Felt aggrieved of the same, the unsuccessful plaintiff in the above said suit filed A.S.No
A suit for permanent injunction is not maintainable when the defendant raises a genuine dispute regarding the plaintiff's title, and the plaintiff fails to prove lawful possession.
In a suit for permanent injunction, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to establish possession and incidental title to the property. Clear title supported by documents is necessary to claim perm....
In a suit for injunction, the burden lies on the plaintiffs to prove prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable loss, failing which the appeal may be dismissed.
Suit filed for perpetual injunction by plaintiff, when there is cloud over title is not maintainable.
A suit for permanent injunction, without seeking a declaration of title, is not maintainable when ownership is disputed; a comprehensive claim is required to address possession and title.
Possession on the date of filing a suit is essential for granting a permanent injunction; the First Appellate Court findings on possession were upheld as correct.
In injunction suits, the plaintiff must establish possession and title; revenue records are not conclusive proof of ownership.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a plaintiff cannot claim injunction against the true owner without lawful possession and title.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
