MOHANBABU AND OTHERS Vs. SMT. RADHABAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY filing this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 29.9.2012, whereby the injunction was granted to the respondent. The order dated 9.10.2012, by which Misc. Appeal of the petitioners is rejected is also called in question.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioners submits that as per plaint averments and the statements of the plaintiff's witnesses, it is clear that the land in question was given from last two years to Shri Pran Singh on "Batai", this shows that plaintiff was not in possession. In fact, petitioners were in possession. Learned Counsel further submits that petitioners are in fact in possession and they have paid "lagaan"/revenue for the same. By placing reliance on certain provisions of M.P. Land Revenue Code, Shri Santosh Agarwal submits that the person who pays the land revenue should be treated to be in possession. The impugned orders are attacked on yet another ground that the suit was only for injunction. The main/final relief cannot be granted by way of interim relief.

(3.) I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.