H.R. Krishnan, J.

This is an application in revision by the defendants in a suit for permanent injunction from the dissident order of the appellate Court granting a temporary injunction of a mandatory nature in favour of the plaintiff-non-applicant, directing the defendants (applicants here) to break down part of the wall constructed by them around their house so that the cattle coming out of the plaintiff's house may be able to go out through the opening.

The facts of the case are comparatively simple and the difference in the factual allegations will be resolved after hearing in the trial Court. At this stage the point for consideration is whether in a situation like this the exceptional course of granting a mandatory injunction to break down part of a structure can be granted, and whether the status quo that is sought to be restored should be the status quo on the date of the intitation of the proceedings or the status quo on an earlier date when according to the plaintiff his encroachment started.

The facts for our purposes can be summarised thus: In village Kogawan the parties live in contiguous structures both of which had been the property of one person in the past. The