RADHEY SHYAM Vs. SMT. VIMLA SINGH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the plaintiff in original suit No. 296 of 1993. By order dated 17.10.98 the trial Court rejected the plaintiff's application for interim injunction with the finding that the plaintiff being out of possession has neither prima facie case nor balance of convenience in his favour. A misc. Appeal No. 197 of 1999 preferred by the plaintiff against the trial Court's order dated 17.10.98 has been dismissed by the impugned order dated 24.7.99. The Appellate Court did not find sufficient ground to interfere with the finding regarding possession recorded by the trial Court.

(2.) NOW , firstly the concurrent finding of fact cannot be upset in writ jurisdiction. Secondly, in the case of "Smt. Parvatibai v. Anwar Ali : 1992(19) ALR 152 (SC)", it was held:

(3.) THE first argument advanced in this case before me by the learned Counsel for the petitioner was also repelled expressly by the same Full Bench in the following words: