Case Note & Summary
The appeal arose from a judgment and order dated 24th June 2004 passed by the learned trial Judge on Applications at Exh.5 and Exh.36 in Special Civil Suit No.547 of 2003. The respondents (original plaintiffs) had filed the suit against the appellants (original defendants) for a declaration that the appellants had no right, title or interest in the suit premises, which was a shop admeasuring 31.05 sq. meters. The respondents also sought an injunction restraining the appellants from interfering with their possession. The trial court had granted an ad-interim injunction in favour of the respondents. The appellants filed an application at Exh.36 seeking to vacate the ad-interim injunction, which was rejected by the trial court. The appellants then filed the present appeal from order. The High Court heard the appeal finally. The court noted that the trial court's order was a discretionary order and unless it was shown to be perverse or based on no evidence, the appellate court would not interfere. The court found that the trial court had considered the material on record and had not committed any error. The court also noted that the defendants were in possession and could not be dispossessed except by due process of law. The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the trial court's order.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Injunction - Refusal to vacate ad-interim injunction - Scope of appeal - The appeal challenged the trial court's order refusing to vacate the ad-interim injunction. The High Court held that the trial court's order was a discretionary order and unless it was shown to be perverse or based on no evidence, the appellate court would not interfere. The court found that the trial court had considered the material on record and had not committed any error. (Paras 1-5) B) Property Law - Tenant's rights - Possession - The suit was for declaration that the defendants/appellants had no right, title or interest in the suit premises. The plaintiffs/respondents claimed that the defendants were tenants. The court noted that the defendants were in possession and could not be dispossessed except by due process of law. The trial court's order protecting possession was upheld. (Paras 2-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court's order refusing to vacate the ad-interim injunction granted in favour of the plaintiffs/respondents was liable to be set aside in appeal.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. The order of the trial court refusing to vacate the ad-interim injunction is upheld.
Law Points
- Tenant's right to remain in possession until evicted by due process of law
- Scope of interference in appeal against discretionary order
- Prima facie case for injunction
