Satpal Singh vs Naib Singh

Surinder Gupta, J. (Oral)

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that possession of plaintiff over the suit property is admitted. However, it has been held to be unauthorized

against true owners. The defendant-respondent filed separate suit seeking the relief of possession against the plaintiff. Courts below have not looked

into this aspect and avoided to allow the relief of permanent injunction to plaintiff to restrain the defendant from interfering in his possession over suit

land till the suit of defendant seeking possession is decreed.

The dispute in this case is only with regard to khasra no. 399 (0-2) which is gair mumkin ruri. It is admitted that the same is ownership of defendant-

respondent, who has filed separate suit seeking the relief of possession. This should have satisfied the appellant that respondent admits his possession

and proceeding in due course of law to get possession under order of Court and is not going to interfere in his possession in a forcible manner. Still

plaintiff is pursuing the relief of injunction against him. Both the Courts below have looked into the plea of plaintiff and have declined to allow him

relief of injunction with observation that a person in unauthorized possession is not entitled to relief of injunction. Even otherwise, it is an equitable

relief and in the facts and circumstances of the case cannot be allowed to plaintiff.

I find no error with the findings of Courts below. This appeal has no merit and the same is dismissed.