Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, original defendants in a civil suit, filed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of temporary injunction granted in favour of the respondent/plaintiff by the trial court and confirmed by the appellate court. The dispute pertained to possession of agricultural land. The trial court, after considering the pleadings and documents, found that the plaintiff was in possession and granted injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with his possession. The appellate court upheld this finding. The petitioners contended that the findings were perverse and that the courts below had misappreciated the evidence. The High Court, however, observed that the scope of interference under Article 227 is limited and that the courts below had recorded concurrent findings of fact based on proper appreciation of evidence. The court noted that the petitioners had not demonstrated any perversity or jurisdictional error. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, and the interim relief granted earlier was vacated. The court directed the trial court to dispose of the suit expeditiously, preferably within one year.
Headnote
A) Constitution of India - Article 227 - Supervisory Jurisdiction - Scope of Interference - The High Court under Article 227 will not interfere with concurrent findings of fact unless they are perverse or based on no evidence - The court found that the courts below had properly appreciated the evidence and recorded findings of possession in favour of the respondent - Held that no interference was warranted (Paras 6-8). B) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 - Temporary Injunction - Possession - The trial court and appellate court granted injunction in favour of the plaintiff/respondent based on evidence of possession and documents - The petitioners/defendants failed to show any perversity in the findings - Held that the injunction was rightly granted (Paras 5-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court in its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India should interfere with the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below regarding possession and grant of temporary injunction.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. Rule discharged. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated. The trial court is directed to dispose of the suit expeditiously, preferably within one year from the date of this order.
Law Points
- Article 227 of the Constitution of India
- supervisory jurisdiction
- concurrent findings of fact
- perversity
- injunction
- possession
- Civil Procedure Code
- 1908
- Order 39 Rules 1 and 2
