Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
ROMESH VERMA
Kamla Devi – Appellant
Versus
Sheela Devi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural history of dismissed injunction suit on joint land. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. dispute over proof of construction and concurrent findings. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. plaintiff failed to prove post-suit construction with evidence. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. no injunction without ouster in joint property; no substantial question. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. appeal dismissed for lack of merit. (Para 21) |
Judgment :
Romesh Verma, J.
The present appeal arises out of judgment and decree as passed by the learned District Judge, Mandi, dated 05.03.2024, whereby the appeal filed by the present appellant has been dismissed and the judgment and decree as passed by learned Senior Civil Judge, Court No.1, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. dated 22.08.2023 has been affirmed.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff/appellant filed a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction under Sections 38 & 39 of the Specific Relief Act in the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge, Court No.1, Mandi, H.P. on 18.11.2016. It was averred in the plaint that the suit land is joint between the parties, therefore, the defendants/respondents be restrained b
Co-owner not entitled to injunction against another's construction on joint land unless proved to amount to ouster or detriment to rights; requires evidence beyond sole testimony, mere jointness insu....
Co-sharer suppressing own construction on joint land approaches without clean hands and cannot restrain others from constructing on their exclusive portion; injunction requires proof of prejudice or ....
Co-owner is not entitled to an injunction restraining another co-owner from exceeding his rights in common property absolutely and simply because he is a co-owner unless any act of person in possessi....
High Court in second appeal under CPC Section 100 cannot disturb concurrent findings of fact unless perverse or involving substantial question of law; co-sharer construction on joint land not ouster ....
(1) Injunction – Such three ingredients are not only to exist but must co-exist – Prima facie case is not to be confused with prima facie title, which requires to be established on evidence at trial.....
In second appeals under CPC Section 100, no interference with concurrent findings of fact unless substantial question of law or perversity; co-sharers may develop joint property if partition not impo....
Civil Law - Grant of Temporary Injunction - Rights and Liabilities of Co-owners - A co-owner is not entitled to an injunction restraining another co-owner from exceeding his rights in common property....
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
