PRAKASH TATIA, J.

( 1 ) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.

( 2 ) LEARNED Counsel for the appellant submitted that the trial Court has committed serious illegality in granting injunction order against the true owner. According to learned counsel for the appellant the agreement alleged by the respondent is forged one and the respondent forcibly took over possession for which a criminal case was registered and challan was filed under Section 427 and 447. IPC and it was also submitted by learned Counsel for the appellant that the agreement, which was alleged to have been executed on 30th April, 1997 was never shown to have been acted upon by the plaintiff. It is also submitted by allegation of giving rs. 14,90,000/- by the defendant-respondent is also absolutely false allegation of fact and, therefore, the trial Court should not have granted any injunction against the appellant, the true. owner. This is nothing but giving premium to the trespasser.

( 3 ) LEARNED Counsel for the respondent vehemently submitted that in this case the respondent has parted with huge amount of Rs. 14,90,000/- and Rs. 10,000/- is due in respondent. The trial Court rightly granted the injunction