The grievance of the learned counsel for the appellants before me is that when once the trial Court has held that the plaintiffs have no prima facie case and that they were not in possession of the property on the date of the suit and that their application for temporary injunction was rejected by the trial Court and the appeal filed before this Hon'ble Court also met with the same fate, now the trial Court was in error in rejecting the application submitted by the defendants. The crucial date to be considered for issuing the injunction is the date on which the suit is filed. When the suit was filed, the defendants were in possession and this possession is not disputed by the other side. Only because during the pendency of the injunction granted by the trial Court, if the plaintiffs take possession, such a possession which is illegal, cannot be protected now by the order of the trial Court.

2. Held: When the plaintiffs submitted an application under Order 39, rules 1 and 2 CPC, it was rejected on the basis that they had no prima facie case and that they were not in possession and when the plaintiffs went before the Hon'ble High Court, the Hon'ble High Court rejected thei