Sakunjay Vyas
Published on: March 04, 2022 at 08:25 IST
The Two Judge Bench of Justice M. R. Shah and Justice B. V. Nagarathna of Supreme Court overturned Gujarat High Court bench order that had given a relief of permanent injunction against the true owner.
The Supreme Court recently ruled that an injunction cannot be issued against a true owner or title holder and in favour of a trespasser or a person in unlawful possession.
The Two-Judge Bench were hearing an appeal against Gujarat High Court bench order that had had given a relief of permanent injunction against the true owner despite acknowledging that the person seeking the relief of injunction is not the true owner.
The Apex Court was stunned at the erroneous view of all the subordinate Courts, the Courts, while deciding the case in which two reliefs were prayed for, first to declare the sale deed bogus and non-binding on previous owner; and second a relief of permanent injunction, despite finding out the sale deed to be legit still granted the relief of permanent injunction against the true owner.
“The High Court has observed that in the instant case the relief of permanent injunction can be said to be a substantive relief, which is clearly an erroneous view.”
the Court said.
The respondent argued that as such there are concurrent findings of fact recorded by all the Courts below holding that the plaintiff is in possession of the entire suit land and that the plaintiff proved by oral as well as documentary evidence that she is cultivating the suit land in question and that she is in possession of the said land. It is submitted that no evidence was led by the defendant to prove his possession.
The appellant submitted that once the relief relating to declaration as to title of the plaintiff to suit land is declined, the Court erred in granting the relief of permanent injunction to protect the alleged “Possession” of the plaintiff and that right from 1975 in the Revenue record, the name of the defendant is shown as a cultivator and in possession.
That the plaintiff failed to get any relief regarding declaration as to title, therefore is not entitled for the permanent injunction.
After hearing both the sides the Apex Court came to the conclusion that Courts below have erred in passing the decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendant from disturbing the alleged possession of the plaintiff. And in the present case it is not open to respondent to contend that even after losing the title her right of possession shall be protected. Further the court added that an injunction shall not be issued against a true owner.
“An injunction cannot be issued against a true owner or title holder and in favour of a trespasser or a person in unlawful possession.”
the Court said.
As a result, the Apex Court overturned Gujarat High Court bench order that had given a relief of permanent injunction against the true owner and held that An injunction cannot be issued against a true owner or title holder and in favour of a trespasser or a person in unlawful possession.
Also Read- What is Illegal possession and action against the Illegal owner?