KARNANI PROPERTIES LIMITED Vs. HARROW HALL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Order allowing amendment of the plaint by the court below dtd. 17/9/2024 passed in Title Suit no. 414 of 2015 is under challenge in the instant Application.

(2.) The brief background is that the opposite party (in short OP) herein as plaintiff filed a suit interalia praying for declaration with regard to the easementary right of the plaintiff to use the schedule mentioned property to the plaint inter alia as playground and for a further declaration that the plaintiff is a licensee under defendant no.1/petitioner herein for using the said schedule property as lawn/playground and also for permanent injunction, being said Title Suit no.414 of 2015. In connection with the said suit, an interim injunction application was also filed praying therein to restrain defendant/petitioner from interfering/restraining the student and teachers of the plaintiff school from using the said playground. Learned trial Judge by an order dtd. 2/4/2015 was pleased to reject the said prayer for ex parte ad interim order of injunction observing that OP had failed to prove prima facie case.

(3.) Being aggrieved by the said order OP herein preferred an appeal before this Court being FMA no. 1906 of 2015 and this High Court affirmed the order of the trial court and held that they did not find it an appropriate case, where ad interim order of injunction should be passed, but directed the Trial Court to dispose of the temporary injunction application on merit. Thereafter Trial court after hearing the parties has been pleased to reject the application for temporary injunction vide order dtd. 17/11/2016, observing that plaintiff failed to show any document that they are in possession of the said lawn on the date of filing of the suit or when they sought for such ad interim order of injunction. The OP herein thereafter again filed an application for reconsideration of the said order dtd. 17/11/2016 but it was again rejected.