ANIL SHARMA Vs. CHAUDHARY RAVINDER KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Regular Second Appeal under Sec. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is filed impugning the concurrent decision of the two courts below; i.e. judgment dated 26th May, 2016 passed by the First Appellate Court in RCA No. 4/2014 and judgment dated 26th Nov., 2013 passed by the learned Trial Court in Civil Suit No. 807/2009 by which the suit of the appellant/plaintiff seeking a decree for permanent injunction has been dismissed in respect of the property described as Bhagwati Mandir, B-34, Govind Mohalla, Haiderpur, Delhi-42.

(2.) Mr. Tanuj Khurana, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that both the Courts below vide their concurrent judgments had committed illegality in going into the title of the appellant/plaintiff in respect of the suit property. He further contended that as the appellant/plaintiff is in possession, the suit simpliciter for injunction was maintainable. Since the cause of action pleaded in the suit was about the interference caused by the respondent/defendant by removing the sign board of Mandir, obstructing the devotees having access to the Mandir from the main road, such type of interference in the lawful possession of the appellant/plaintiff could have been injuncted by a decree for permanent injunction for which suit simpliciter for injunction was maintainable.

(3.) In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon a decision of Honourable Supreme Court reported as Anathula Sudhakar Vs. P. Buchi Reddy (Dead) by LRs & Others; (2008) 4 SCC 594.