Mohanlal vs Shravan Kumar - 2016 Supreme(MP) 872

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2016 Supreme(MP) 872

VIVEK RUSIA
Mohanlal – Appellant
Versus
Shravan Kumar – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Satish Jain, learned counsel.

ORDER :

Vivek Rusia, J.

1. Counsel for the petitioners heard on the question of admission and on interim relief.

2. The petitioners being the defendants has filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, being aggrieved by order dated 12.02.2016 passed in Civil Suit No.30-A/2012 by which the application under Order 6, Rule 17 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 filed by the plaintiffs have been allowed.

Facts of the case are as under:

3. That the respondents/plaintiffs had initially filed the suit for grant of injunction on the ground that they are the owners and are in possession of the disputed property.

4. After notice, written statement was filed by the present petitioners/defendants along with counter claim with a pleadings that they are the owners and are in possession of the disputed property. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that temporary injunction was sought by the plaintiffs/respondents restraining the defendants not to interfere with their peaceful possession. The said temporary injunction was rejected. Thereafter, miscellaneous appeal was filed which was also dismissed. When the case was fixed for evidence, the plaintiffs/r