The courts emphasized that temporary injunctions require proof of irreparable loss and clean hands, and that the trial must determine the rights over the property.

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA)

The present petition is filed by defendant Nos.7 to 24 seeking the following reliefs:

“a) Issue a writ of in the nature of certiorari, quashing the impugned order on IA.No.29 and 31 filed under 39 Rule 1 and 2 R/W. 151 of CPC., respectively passed by the Hon’ble Principal Civil Judge and JMFC Belagavi in OS.No.608/2010 dated 03.11.2014 consequently set aside the order passed in Miscellaneous Appeal (MA) No.62/14, 63/14 and 76/14 dated 24.09.2016, passed by the 1st Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM Belagavi vide Annexure-F and G respectively in the interest of justice and equity.

b) Pass any other as this Hon’bel Court deems fit on the facts circumstances of the case.”

2. Respondent No.1/plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.608/2010 seeking the following reliefs:

“A) A DECREE for permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their agents, servants, henchmen or any person or persons acting or purporting to act on their behalf from making illegal construction and thereby interfering with the plaintiff’s actual, physical possession, occupation and enjoyment of the suit property.

(AA) A Decree for mandatory injuction be granted directing the defendants to demolish and take away all the temporary sheds which they have/caused to have constructed in and upon the suit property land, and in case of their failure to do so the same the removed through the process of the court.

B) A DECREE awarding costs of this suit to the plaintiff from the defendants.

C) A DECREE awarding any other relief which this Hon’ble court deems fit and proper to the plaintiff.

D) AN ORDER granting permission to amend the plaint if found necessary.”

3. The said suit has been contested by defendant No.7 and also by other defendants. I.A.No.29 was filed by defendant Nos.7 to 25 under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 R/w Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure Hereinafter referred to as ‘CPC’ for an ad- interim injunction to restrain the plaintiff from alienating the suit property. The said application was objected by the plaintiff. I.A.No.30 was filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 R/w Section 151 of CPC by the plaintiff to restrain defendant Nos.7 to 25 for interfering with the plaintiff’s possession of the suit property.

4. The Trial Court while considering the said applications vide its order dated 03.11.2014 has recorded the following findings:

“26. It is true that the plaintiff has sought the relief of ad- interim injunction against the defendants in I.A.No.30 and sought ad-interim relief in respect of her actual physical possession, occupation and enjoyment of the suit property. It is to be noted that this contention of the plaintiff is clearly opposed by the learned counsel for the defendants No.7 to 25 by filing IA.No.31 and IA.No.29 on the ground that thus plaintiff is attempting to sell the portion of the suit property and in this regard, these defendants have issued a public notion in paper publications and also submitted the memorandum to the Deputy commissioner. It is to be noted that defendants No.7 to 25 have alleged that plaintiff is trying to alienate the suit property to other parties and interfering the actual physical possession of these defendants in respect of suit property. It is true that these defendants No.7 to 25 have not sought any counter claim in respect of the relief sought in the present suit and other allegations, are not incidental to the cause of action as pleaded in the present suit At the same time, this court has already observed while discussing on point Nos. 1 and 2 that this court is not suppose to put forth its opinion regarding possession over the suit property unless and until the evidence on both side