BHAGWAN Vs. MANIBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF 's suit for declaration of title and issuance of permanent preventive injunction has been dismissed by the lower appellate Court in reversal of the decree of the trial Court. The lower appellate Court has further directed possession over the suit property being restored to the defendant along with compensation in an amount of Rs. 200/ - to be paid by the plaintiff to the defendants. Aggrieved plaintiff has come up in second appeal. This Court admitted the appeal for hearing parties on the following two substantial questions of law: -

(2.) NOT only the plaintiff's suit has been held liable to be dismissed, the lower appellate Court has also arrived at a finding that the plaintiff/appellant who was not in possession of the suit property on the date of the filing of the suit, had also succeeded in securing a temporary injunction from the trial Court by stating false facts and thereby managed in entering into possession over the suit property in the garb of the interim injunction order. Having formed that opinion, the lower appellate Court while dismissing the suit, has directed the plaintiff to restore possession over the suit property to the defendants. There is no merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that in the absence of a cross suit or counter -claim preferred by the defendants, order for restoration of possession to the defendants could not have been passed. It is well settled that no person shall suffer by a wrong order of the Court. The lower appellate Court has formed an unhesitating opinion that the plaintiff/appellant did not deserve any interim injunction order being passed in his favour as he was certainly not in possession of the suit property on the date of the suit. It is the wrong injunction order of the trial Court which became instrumental in plaintiff depriving the defendants of their possession over the suit property. When the Court superseded that interim injunction order it was not only empowered but was duty -bound to undo the wrong done under its order which had ceased to exist. No exception can be taken to the relief allowed by the Court below to the defendants. Question No.2. : - -