Back
ARINDAM LODH
Sudarshan Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Raja Paul – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Arindam Lodh, J.
1. Heard Mr. S. Deb, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Also heard Mr. K.N. Bhattacharjee, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. D. Debbarma, learned counsel, appearing for the respondents.
2. This is an appeal filed under Order XLIII, Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, challenging the order dated 17.03.2020 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Sr. Division, in case No. Civil Misc. (Vio) 26 of 2018 arising out of Civil Misc. 46 of 2017 in connection with Title Suit No. 15 of 2016, titled as Shri Sudarshan Sharma, petitioner Vrs. Shri Raja Paul and Bijoy Kumar Paul, opposite party-respondents.
3. Briefly stated, the appellant here-in as plaintiff instituted a suit for declaration of his right to use the pathway described in Schedule-B of the plaint. Along with this declaratory suit the appellant also had filed an application under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 & 2 of CPC. The learned trial court after hearing the petition for injunction under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 passed an order granting temporary mandatory injunction meaning thereby the structure erected on the pathway obstructing free egress an
A pathway's accessibility is vital for rightful access to property, requiring removal of obstructions.
The court upheld the trial court's injunction order, affirming the plaintiff's exclusive ownership of the pathway and rejecting the defendants' claims of easementary rights due to lack of evidence.
The court upheld the exclusivity of the plaintiff's property rights over the pathway against the appellants' easement claims.
The court established that a suit filed by an aggrieved property owner does not require conversion into a representative suit under the CPC when the claim is specific to the owner's rights.
The Appellate Court cannot, in an appeal against an interim order, appoint a commissioner to collect evidence on merits or pre-emptively decide factual disputes that are explicitly reserved for full ....
A permanent injunction cannot be granted based on assumptions of trespassing when evidence indicates the existence of an established passage at the inception of the suit, and such injunctions are uns....
The court emphasized the need to maintain equitable balance between the parties and found that the installation of railings by the defendants violated the previous court order, leading to interferenc....
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
