THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT AT GUWAHATI (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) PRINCIPAL SEAT AT GUWAHATI
ROBIN PHUKAN
Kuaripukhuri High School A, Represented by its Headmaster cum Member Secretary – Appellant
Versus
Md. Abdul Jalil, S/o. Late Sadek Ali – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. establishing the factual background and procedural history of the land dispute. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. parties' conflicting contentions regarding possessory rights and tenancy status under the 1971 act. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. the requirement of a prima facie case as a condition for equitable injunction relief. (Para 9 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. evaluating lower court findings regarding balance of convenience and irreparable harm. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. public interest and the conduct of parties in seeking equitable discretionary relief. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
JUDGEMENT :
ROBIN PHUKAN, J.
Heard Mr. K. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M.U. Mahmud, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. In this petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 115 of the CPC, the petitioner has challenged the judgment and order dated 12.11.2024, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Darrang at Mangaldai (appellate court hereinafter), in Misc. Appeal No. 14/2023.
3. It is to be noted here that vide impugned judgment and order dated 12.11.2024, the learned appellate court had affirmed the ad- interim temporary injunction order dated 02.1
Suresh Kr. Dhanuka vs. Kedar Nath Dhanuka
Dalpat Kumar vs. Prahlad Singh
Seema Arshad Zaheer vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
Mahadeo Savlaram Shelke and Others vs. Pune Municipal Corporation and Another
The court established that for a temporary injunction, a prima facie case, irreparable loss, and balance of convenience must all be satisfied.
Merely having prima-facie case would not entitle an applicant to an injunction. The applicant has to satisfy all the three ingredients.
The court reinforced that adverse possession claims are valid in injunction disputes when supported by continuous possession and that public interest considerations may outweigh private claims.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.