ORDER :

1. This appeal has been filed at the instance of the appellant against the order passed by the learned Judge, Court No. 22, City Civil & Sessions Court, Ahmedabad whereby the learned Judge was pleased to restrain the original defendant-appellant herein from dispossessing, transferring the suit land to third party or creating disturbances in possession of the plaintiffs during the pendency and till final disposal of the suit.

2. The facts leading to the filing of this appeal may be summarized as follows:

2.1 The original plaintiffs have filed Civil Suit (CCC) No. 1158 of 2022 for declaration and permanent injunction against the defendant. In the said suit, it is the case of the plaintiffs that the plaintiffs have been residing in land bearing Survey No. 281/2, T.P. Scheme No. 26, Final Plot No. 225 admeasuring 7821 square meters situated at mauje Vasna, Taluka Sabarmati, District Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as the “disputed suit property”) since 1987 and doing farming in the suit land and supporting them and their family. It is the case of the plaintiffs that since the disputed suit property was lying vacant, they built a hut in the suit land and started living there and also started sowing the suit land and got earnings from the crops. It is also the case of the plaintiffs that they have also got electricity connection at the hut in the disputed suit property and the said fact is within the knowledge of the defendant. It is the case of the plaintiffs that since the defendant and his agents are threatening the plaintiffs and trying to dispossess the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs have filed the suit. The learned trial court on the interim application i.e. Notice of Motion Exh.6/7 filed by the plaintiffs granted an order of injunction, as prayed for.

3. The appellant-original defendant entered appearance and denied the material allegations made in the application for injunction by filing an affidavit and it was urged that the application for injunction must be rejected.

4. The learned trial Court by an order dated 12.4.2023 allowed the application filed by the respondents herein-original plaintiffs, inter-alia, on a finding that “the plaintiffs have been successful in establishing that they have a prima facie case and balance of convenience also tilts in their favour and if the defendant is not restrained then the plaintiffs will suffer irreparable loss which cannot be compensated in terms of money and hence, the rights of the plaintiffs are required to be protected.”

5. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 12.4.2023 passed by the learned Judge, Court No. 22, City Civil & Sessions Court, Ahmedabad, the appellant-original defendant has approached this Court by way of filing the present Appeal from Order.

6. Heard Mr. Manish Bhatt, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Jay Kansara and Ms. Urvi Khandelwal, advocates for M/s Wadia Ghandy and Company for the appellant and Mr. Malaykumar S. Patel, learned advocate for the respondents-original plaintiffs and examined the impugned order of the learned trial court and also the averments and contentions made in the application for injunction and the objections thereto in depth and in detail.

7. Mr. Manish Bhatt, learned senior advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant-original defendant has vehemently submitted that the learned trial Court has failed to consider the material placed on record by the parties in its proper perspective and has misdirected itself whilst passing the impugned order. Mr. Bhatt has submitted that the learned trial Court has purely proceeded on inferential basis on the purported lacuna of the case of the appellant-original defendant at the time of passing the impugned order even without the respondents-original plaintiffs discharging their initial onus of proving their case and the learned trial Court has proceeded on a prima facie misconstruction of the documents filed by the respondents-original plaintiffs as well as the appellant-origin