Honble TATIA, J.–Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents.

(2). In this case, the trial court refused the injunction by order dated 11.4.2001 in a suit filed by the appellant plaintiff. According to the learned counsel for the appellant since appellant is in settled possession of the land in dispute, therefore, he has a right to protect his possession and no one can take law in his own hands to evict him, even a true owner has no right to dispossess him from the land in dispute. According to the learned counsel for the appellant the appellant plaintiff was in possession when the land in dispute was recorded in the name of the Shri Bhura Ram. The title to the land vesting in Bhura Ram is not in dispute and therefore, when the plaintiff was in possession for about 20 years then his settled possession cannot be disturbed. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that Bhura Ram executed a sale deed dated 20.4.1981 in favour of 76 persons and by this act Bhura Ram transferred his big land including land in dispute also in favour of the purchasers. Despite the above sale deed in favour of above persons, the plaintiff remained in posses

Click Here to Read the rest of this document