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

1970 Supreme(Ker) 67

E.K.MOIDU
Sankara Pillai Madhavan Pillai – Appellant
Versus
Inez Rosario – Respondent


Advocates:
Panicker and Potti, for Petitioner; K. George Varghese, for Respondent.

ORDER :-

The question that arises for determination in this Civil Revision Petition is whether the respondent-plaintiff has made out a case for temporary injunction restraining the petitioner-3rd defendant from entering upon the plaint property and conducting a tutorial college thereon and also restraining the petitioner disturbing the quiet possession of the respondent. The suit out of which the petition for temporary injunction arose was one for recovery of possession of the plaint schedule property and also for a mandatory injunction directing the defendants in the suit to demolish the 4 sheds erected on the property and by removing the same therefrom thereby giving vacant possession of the property to the respondent. Both the courts below granted the temporary injunction as prayed for. The decretal order passed by the trial court is couched in the following words: "The defendants are restrained from conducting any tutorial college in the 4 sheds constructed by the 3rd defendant. They are also restrained from putting up any additional shed or from interfering with the possession of the plaint schedule property by the plaintiff."

2. It is admitted case that the petitioner is condu





























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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top