Possession rights must be protected during title disputes in civil courts even if administrative proceedings are ongoing.

1. This petition under Art.227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the plaintiff / petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 02.08.2022 (Annexure P / 1) passed in Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No.22/2021 by the Second Additional District Judge, Jhabua affirming the order dated 25.09.2021 (Annexure P / 7) passed in Civil Suit No.72 - A / 2020 by the Civil Judge Senior Division, Thandla, District Jhabua whereby his application under O.39, R.1 and R.2 of the CPC had been rejected.

2. As per plaintiff, he is in legal possession of the suit lands total measuring 1.190 hectare at Gram Phuledi, Tehsil Meghnagar, District Jhabua. The same are recorded in the name of defendant No.1 in the revenue records. On 28.04.1997 defendant No.1 had entered into an agreement with him for sale of the suit lands in his favour for a total consideration of Rs.77,500/- upon receiving the entire consideration. An agreement was also executed between the parties in that regard. Since no sale deed of the transaction was executed, the same is void and he has been in adverse possession of the suit lands ever since then for past 23 years. However, taking advantage of being recorded over the suit lands in the revenue records defendant No.1 has filed an application before the Tehsildar, Meghnagar for obtaining possession of the suit lands.

3. On the aforesaid contentions the plaintiff instituted an action for declaration of his title to the suit lands, declaration that he is entitled for being recorded over the suit lands in the revenue records and for permanent injunction restraining defendant No.1 from interfering with his possession over the suit lands.

4. Alongwith the plaint, plaintiff also filed an application under O.39, R.1 and R.2 of the CPC for issuance of temporary injunction restraining defendant No.1 from interfering with his possession over the suit lands and from alienating the same in favour of any third person.

5. Defendant No.1 contested the application by filing his reply submitting that plaintiff does not have any title to the suit lands, that he is an encroacher thereupon and being an encroacher he is not entitled for grant of any relief in his favour. The averments as made by plaintiff as regards acquisition of title by virtue of adverse possession are neither legal nor based on correct facts. Defendant No.1 has already instituted legal proceedings for obtaining possession of the suit lands which cannot be stayed. The suit is not maintainable hence plaintiff is not entitled for issuance of temporary injunction in his favour.

6. The Courts below have rejected plaintiff's application for issuance of temporary injunction by holding that though he is in possession of the suit lands but such possession cannot be protected since the same is by way of encroachment. Defendant No.1 has already instituted proceedings under S.250 of M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959 against plaintiff for obtaining possession of the suit lands which cannot be said to be an illegal act on his part. The defendant No.1 is taking recourse to law for obtaining possession of the suit lands which proceedings cannot be stayed by issuance of temporary injunction. It has been further observed that the agreement to sale produced by plaintiff shall be examined at the time of evidence and has also to be proved and all the questions raised by plaintiff are matters of evidence.

7. Learned counsel for the plaintiff has submitted that the Courts below have themselves held plaintiff to be in possession of the suit lands but have illegally declined to issue temporary injunction in his favour. His possession is settled possession and not sporadic by way of encroachment. His claim is for decla