Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
VIKAS BAHL
Dharampal – Appellant
Versus
Haryana State – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
VIKAS BAHL, J.
1. Present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the impugned order dated 24.05.2022 (Annexure P-6) passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Hisar, whereby the application of the petitioner under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC has been dismissed. Challenge is also to the order dated 31.05.2022 (Annexure P-8) passed by the Additional District Judge, Hisar, whereby the prayer of the petitioner for the grant of interim stay has been declined.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had filed a suit for permanent injunction and mandatory injunction restraining the respondents from interfering in the peaceful possession of the plaintiff in the plot in question. It is further submitted that the plaintiff was in possession of the property from the time of his forefathers and had been staking fooder etc. and had also been keeping cow cakes and bricks etc. in the property in question. It is argued that the respondent had issued a notice dated 12.04.2022 (Annexure P-1) under Section 24(1) of the HARYANA GRAM PANCHAYATI RAJ ACT , 1994 (hereina
Injunctions under the Specific Relief Act cannot be granted if they impede infrastructure projects, especially when the party lacks ownership or lease rights to the property in question.
The dissolution of previous rights after land acquisition and the plaintiff's failure to challenge the acquisition proceedings.
The lack of prima facie evidence negates the basis for granting an injunction in land possession disputes.
A party seeking a temporary injunction must establish lawful possession, a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury.
The court upheld the legality of an ex-parte order for encroachment due to the petitioner's failure to present evidence, affirming the Executing Court's findings.
The court held that the petitioners failed to establish a prima facie case for an interim injunction, emphasizing the balance between property rights and public interest in infrastructure projects.
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
