RAMESH KUMAR Vs. VINOD KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER filed a suit for permanent and mandatory injunction with a prayer that respondent No.2 be restrained from interfering in his possession in the shop, in dispute, forcibly. In that suit, he also moved an application for interim injunction, which was dismissed. He failed in appeal. It has been noticed by both the Courts below that so far as status of the petitioner is concerned, he is not better than a tress-passer. At no time, this shop was leased out to him. He may have, with the connivance of respondent No.1, entered in possession of the property. This Court feels that the order passed is perfectly justified. No case is made out for interference. Dismissed.