Back
MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Nagar Palika Hindaun City – Appellant
Versus
Hukum Singh Adopted – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Mr. Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J. - This civil second appeal is preferred by the appellant/defendant (for brevity, "defendant") against the judgment and decree dated 19.02.2011 passed by the learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track), Hindaun City (for brevity, "the learned Appellate Court") in Civil Regular First Appeal No.66/2010 whereby, while dismissing the appeal, the judgment dated 26.07.2007 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (J.D.) No.1, Hindaun City (for brevity, "the learned trial Court") decreeing the suit No.28/2004 (16/99) filed by the respondent/plaintiff (for brevity, "the plaintiff") for permanent injunction, has been upheld.
2. The relevant facts in brief are that the plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction against the defendant stating therein that he was under the ownership and possession of the subject suit shop as described in Para No.1 of the plaint. It was alleged that the defendant wanted to demolish the shop reckoning it as a part of public toilet. Thus, the decree as aforesaid was prayed for.
3. The defendants in its written statement submitted that the subject shop was constructed by the plaintiff on the land of public toilet only
Decrees favoring individuals without substantiated claims of possession undermine legal protections for public property.
In a suit for permanent injunction, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to establish possession and incidental title to the property. Clear title supported by documents is necessary to claim perm....
A suit for injunction simplicitor is not maintainable without a declaration of ownership, especially when the plaintiff admits that part of the property is in the possession of the defendants.
Tenants cannot be forcibly dispossessed without legal grounds, and tenancy agreements must be upheld, as reaffirmed by the court.
Trespassers cannot obtain an injunction against true owners without proving identifiable rights in the property.
Suit filed for perpetual injunction by plaintiff, when there is cloud over title is not maintainable.
A suit for permanent injunction is not maintainable when the defendant raises a genuine dispute regarding the plaintiff's title, and the plaintiff fails to prove lawful possession.
When the plaintiff's title to the property is in dispute and there is a threat of dispossession, the plaintiff should sue for declaration of title and the consequential relief of injunction.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
