Mohd. Shabir (Now Deceased) Through His Legal Heirs And ORS v. Gram Panchayat Of Village Barkatpura (Jafrabad)
!"!
#$ %& & '& ( )(*
+( , (
&& !!
# -"
.
-"/"
'
.
++ 0 )* && "1 # # '$
2+ '& (
+ 0( +
+ 0( +3 )-4*
!
"# $ %
! '
(
) * +
!
!
"
# !
,
"
- res integra
!
$ " % &
.
* ,
!
/ "3. In this case, the suit has been filed by the husband of the applicants for injunction on his assertion of possession in the property. This claim is denied by the defendant, who is the brother, who claims that he had purchased the property from his mother and he is actually in possession. A possessory right in relation to immovable property is a tangible right that always survives. If the husband was therefore claiming that he was in actual physical possession of the property and he was seeking to fend off obstructions and disturbances from the defendant, the same right could be pursued by the widow also. It is not very clear from the judgment in Devinder Singh (supra), the nature of suit and whether any tangible right to immovable property was asserted or not. I am not able to therefore refer to the judgment as laying down any general proposition that a suit for injunction cannot survive to a legal representatives.
4. The relief of injunction is in the nature of a specific relief and set out through elaborate provisions in Chapter'VII, Part' III of the Specific Relief Act. The said part comprises of the principles of injunction to be granted generally, the nature of injunction as temporary, perpetual and also the types of injunction that include mandatory injunction. It also provides specific instances when damages could be claimed in lieu of or in addition to injunction. A provision for damages is certainly a right that could survive if it is not in the nature of the excepted provisions under Section 306 of the Indian Succession Act, referred to above."
!
$ % &
'2 #, '#''
5
'6 %73
)
+ 0( +* Ayub
Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes/No