SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.
Veena Bhojwani - Appellant
Versus
Anju Jani - Respondent
FAO 210 of 2021 & CM. Appl. 30419 of 2021
Decided On : 24-01-2022




The court clarified that an injunction cannot stand if the party seeking it is not presently in possession of the property.

Headnote:(A) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 39, Rule 1 & 2 - Preliminary injunction - The respondent's application for a temporary injunction to restrain the appellants from interfering with possession was allowed by the trial court, despite the respondent conceding that he was not in possession of the property. (Paras 2-4)

(B) Status Quo - Appellants undertook to maintain status quo regarding the subject property until the suit's disposal. (Para 5)

Facts of the case:
The dispute pertains to possession of property between the appellant and respondent, with the respondent previously evicted via a District Magistrate's order. (Par 3)

Findings of Court:
The appeal is disposed of with a modification of the trial court's order to clarify that the appellants shall not interfere with the respondent's peaceful possession, although the respondent is not in possession. (Para 8)

Issues: The main issue addressed is the lack of the respondent's current possession of the property, which challenges the grounds for the injunction.

Ratio Decidendi: The court modified the order by acknowledging that the respondent is not in possession and accepted the undertaking from the appellants to not create any third-party rights. (Para 7)

Result: Appeal disposed of with modifications.

Table of Content
1. order allowing respondent's application for possession (Para 2)
2. arguments regarding possession status (Para 3 , 4)
3. undertaking accepted by the court (Para 5 , 6)
4. modification of the impugned order regarding possession (Para 7 , 8)
5. clarification on trial court findings (Para 9 , 10)
6. disposition of the appeal and order communication (Para 11 , 12)

JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.

2. Appellants impugn order dated 23.02.2021 whereby the application filed by respondent (plaintiff) under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 has been allowed and the appellants have been directed not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the respondent in the subject property and also not to create any third party rights in the suit property till the disposal of the suit.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that admittedly respondent was not in possession of the subject property as is evident from an application filed by the respondent before the Trial Court dated 12.07.2019 wherein it is specifically mentioned that respondent was evicted from the suit property pursuant to an order passed by the District Magistrate under the Maintenance & Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act and possession was handed over on 04.07.2019.

4. Learned counsel for respondent concedes that respondent is not in possession of the subject property.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants undertakes that appellants shall maintain status quo with regard to the ground floor of the subject property and shall not create any third party interest in the subject property till the disposal of the suit.

6. The undertaking is accepted.

7. Learned counsel for the parties submits that since respondent is not in possession of the subject property, the impugned order dated 23.02.2021 be modified to the limited extent that it directs appellants not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the respondent in the subject property.

8. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of and impugned order dated 23.02.2021 is modified to the limited extent that it restrains the appellant from interfering in the peaceful possession of the respondent.

9. However, keeping in view of the undertaking given by the appellants, appellants shall not create any third party rights in the subject property till the disposal of the suit.

10. It is further clarified that the factual observations and findings returned by the trial court in the impugned order shall be treated as prima facie findings and shall not be relied on at the time of final disposal of the suit and shall have no bearing on the merit of the case of either party.

11. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.

12. Copy of the order be uploaded on the High Court website and be also forwarded to learned counsels through e-mail by the Court Master.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top