AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
The present application has been filed for
quashing the impugned order by the appellate court below in appeal
which was filed against the order of injunction granted in favour of
the plaintiff-respondents in the suit.
The learned counsel for the petitioners has
submitted that the petitioners have got their residential house in the
plot and therefore the plaintiff in the garb of injunction only intends to
dispossess the petitioners from their house. It has also been submitted
that both the courts below have not properly considered the matter and
has wrongly negated the case of the defendant.
The learned counsel for the respondent no.1,
however, has pointed out that the petitioner no.1 is purchaser from
petitioner no.2 who had no title remaining now after the acquisition of
entire land by the Railway and therefore any transfer made by the
petitioner no.2 in favour of petitioner no.1 was clearly void and
illegal. The learned counsel has further put emphasis on the case of
the plaintiff being in possession over the disputed land.
After considering the submissions and perusal of
the materials on record, it is manifest that both the courts below have
come to the concurrent finding that the plaintiff has got prima facie
case, balance of convenience and irreparable injury in his favour. This
Court has not been persuaded to hold that the concurrent findings of
fact by both the courts below suffer from vice of perversity or
unreasonableness. In that view of the matter, this Court is not inclined
to interfere in the impugned order under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India.
The application is accordingly dismissed.