Injunctions cannot be granted against true owners unless the claimant demonstrates lawful possession, aligning with principles of equitable relief.

ORDER :

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the order dated 13.5.2025, annexure P/17, passed by 6th District Judge, Damoh, in Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No.7 of 2025, whereby the Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Order 43 Rule 1 CPC challenging the order dated 25.1.2025 annexure P/16 has been dismissed and the order dated 25.1.2025 allowing the application submitted by the respondent/plaintiff under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC has been affirmed.

2. It has been contended by the petitioner that both the courts below have committed grave error of law in not considering the documents in its true perspective. It has further been submitted that the findings arrived at bythe courts below are perverse to the evidence and material available on record. It has been submitted that the petitioner is a bonafide purchaser of the land in question through registered sale deed dated 10.6.2022, annexure P/8. It is submitted that the petitioner has purchased the land bearing survey number 262/1 ad measuring area 0.75 hectares situated at village Mauja Karaiya Hazari, Halka No.39, Tahsil Damoh, District Damoh.

3. It is submitted that a suit has been filed by the respondent /plaintiff for declaration of sale deed dated 10.6.2022 as null and void and permanent injunction in regard to survey number 260/1 and 262/1 of which details have been mentioned in para 1 of the plaint, annexure P/10. The said numbers were claimed by the respondent/ plaintiff on the basis of allotment of bhumiswami rights, which has been said to be done in favour of father of the plaintiff namely Jamuna Singh. It has been further submitted in the plaint that defendant No.3 Hariram has sold the disputed land to the defendant no.1 Madanlal vide sale-deed dated 26.5.1993, annexure P/1. It has further been averred that the said land was further sold to defendant No.2 vide registered sale-deed dated 10.6.2022, annexure P/8. It has been noticed by the plaintiff on the basis of demarcation report. It has further been averred that the plaintiff has been in possession of half portion of land bearing survey No.262/1 on the basis of Will dated 20.4.2004. It has been submitted that the petitioner /defendant in collusion with the authorities of the Revenue Department has got conducted demarcation and shown his possession, but, in fact, the respondent /plaintiff has been in possession over 0.61 hectares land of survey no.262/1, wherein his house and well are situated. It has furtherbeen submitted that the demarcation report has been challenged before this Court in M.P.No.4024/2023 by the respondent/ Plaintiff and this Court vide order dated 4.9.2023 has directed to maintain status quo and despite of such an order, the petitioner is trying to dispossess the respondent/ plaintiff from the suit land and on the basis of such pleadings the petitioner has sought declaration that sale deed executed in favour of the petitioner and defendants be declared null and void and the petitioner and the defendants be restrained by permanent injunction by directing not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the respondent/plaintiff.

4. It has fur