T.Laxmikantan And Others v. Poomail

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ...

CO/10/2021 T. Laxmikantan and others ...

Petitioners Vs.

Poomail ... Respondent December 10, 2021 [GNC] Item No.3 The Revisional Application is taken up for consideration subsequent to the order dated December 8, 2021. On December 8, 2021 prayer for adjournment was made on behalf of the petitioners was considered. On such date it was submitted that the arguing counsel will be available on December 10, 2021.

None appears for the petitioners today. No prayer for adjournment is made.

The Revisional Application is directed against a judgment and order dated August 5, 2021 passed by the learned First Appellate Court in Misc. Appeal No.12 of 2021. The Misc. Appeal was directed against an order No.6 dated July 19, 2021 by which the learned Trial Judge allowed an order of injunction in Title Suit No.21 of 2021.

It appears from the records that the plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession in respect of the immovable property concerned in the suit. The plaintiff filed an application for temporary injunction in which an ad-interim order of injunction was passed on June 30, 2021. The

application for injunction was disposed of by the order dated July 19, 2021. The learned Trial Judge allowed the prayer for injunction.

By the impugned judgment and order, the First Appellate Court considered the scope of the suit and the order granting injunction. The learned First Appellate Court is of the view that the learned Trial Judge after considering the rival contentions of the parties passed an elaborate order and that there was no infirmity in the order of the learned Trial Judge. The petitioners herein are the owners of the adjacent plot of land of the opposite party. It is the case of the opposite party before the trial Court that the petitioners were making constructions beyond its ownership and that the petitioners were making such constructions after encroaching into the property of the opposite party.

Considering the rival contentions of the rival parties learned trial Judge granting order of injunction which was affirmed by the First Appellate Court by the impugned judgment and order.

There is an overt act of the petitioners in encroaching upon the land belonging to the opposite party and making constructions thereat. Unless restrained, the petitioners will make the suit infructuous and will cause harm and prejudice to the opposite party for which money compensation may not be adequate relief. Consequently an injunction as granted is called for to maintain the subject matter of the suit in the same status as on the filing of the suit till its disposal.

In such conspectus, I find no infirmity in the impugned judgment and order warranting interference of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

CO/10/2021 is dismissed.

(Debangsu Basak, J. )