Back
NIDHI GUPTA
Naresh Saini – Appellant
Versus
Sunil Chauhan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner acquired ownership of the property. (Para 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding ownership and construction rights. (Para 3 , 5) |
| 3. court's analysis on possession and legal remedies. (Para 4 , 6 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. details surrounding initial injunction order. (Para 8) |
| 5. court's directive to restore possession. (Para 14) |
JUDGMENT :
Nidhi Gupta, J. - Present revision petition has been filed seeking setting aside/modifying the impugned order dated 07.01.2021 passed by the ld. Civil Judge (Junior Division) Gurugram whereby the application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff under Section 151 CPC, for issuance of direction to SHO to stop the construction work at the spot, has been dismissed.
2. Facts in brief are that the petitioner acquired ownership-in-possession of Plot measuring 355.5 square yards situated within the Lal Dora of Abadi of Village Wazirpur, District Gurugram by way transfer deed bearing Vasika No.892/20.07.2020. He filed civil suit seeking decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants/respondents herein, from interfering in the peaceful possession of the petitioner/plaintiff, and also raising any objections on construction by the petiti
The court upheld that a judicial decision must align strictly with the relief sought by the party, reinforcing limitations on judicial discretion.
A temporary injunction cannot be granted without discussing essential principles, and a property owner cannot be restrained from using their property without a strong prima facie case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that at the stage of considering an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC, the trial Court need not conduct a roving inquiry into the fact....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioner's application for restoration of possession should be decided prior to the enforcement of the Trial Court's directions, and the....
Power of Court, under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, is to preserve subject matter of lis and to maintain status quo, regarding suit property, as, it exists on date of inception of lis between parties.
Tenants cannot be forcibly dispossessed without legal grounds, and tenancy agreements must be upheld, as reaffirmed by the court.
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
