Back
THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK
BHASKAR RAJ PRADHAN
Srijana Gurung – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, Through the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways, Government of India, 1, Sansad Marg, New Delhi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual context and procedural history of the injunction application. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. contentions regarding national highway construction and scope of injunction. (Para 4) |
| 3. state must prove legal acquisition to deprive property rights. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. protection of residential property absent due process of law. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
JUDGMENT :
Bhaskar Raj Pradhan, J.
1. The issue before this Court is very limited. The plaintiffs i.e. the appellants herein challenges the impugned order of the learned District Judge dated 01.08.2024 declining to grant injunction on an application under Order XXXIX, Rule 1 and 2 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC).
2. The learned District Judge was of the opinion that although the appellants had shown a prima facie case in their favour they failed to show that they would suffer irreparable loss and damages which cannot be adequately compensated and that their inconvenience will far exceed the convenience of the defendants i.e. the respondents herein. Holding so the application for injunction was rejected.
3. The suit filed by the appellants is based on a factual assertion in the plaint whic
The constitutional mandate dictates that no individual shall be deprived of property without due process of law. Consequently, where the state fails to demonstrate prior lawful acquisition or authori....
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 plaintiff must prove ownership outside any acquired land, and shifting the burden to the defendant is legally erroneous.
The need for a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable loss for granting injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(1) Interim Injunction – Relief of interim injunction is an equitable relief for grant of which petitioner must be able to establish prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss.(2) ....
Civil Law - Rendition of a decree for permanent prohibitory - Ipso facto they are concluded to rather accept conclusions as made therein, in, as much, as defendants making encroachments upon a portio....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the relief of possession by way of demolition, as an alternative to the principal relief, could be accorded by the court.
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 dissolution of previous rights after land acquisition and the plaintiff's failure to challenge the acquisition proceedings.
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
