KAMAL JEET SINGH & OTHERS Vs. NARMEET SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff/respondent herein, filed, a simplicitor suit, for permanent prohibitory injunction, for, restraining the defendants/petitioners herein, from, interfering in the suit property, and, for preventing the defendants, from, precluding the plaintiff from exclusively operating the business, from the suit premises. In the plaint, it is averred of on 22.1.2017, whereat the plaintiff, was, at Delhi, at his in-laws' abode, his thereat hence, receiving a telephonic intimation of the locks installed by him, upon the suit property, being broken , whereafter he avers of his reporting, the matter through email, on 22.01.2017 to the S.P., Solan. The defendants in the written statement, denied the factum of the plaintiff exclusively, running the apposite business, from, the suit premises, by changing its hitherto nomenclature from M/s Tarlochan Singh & sons Flour Mills, to, M/s Itan's. In support thereto they appended certain documentary material. Furthermore, the defendants in the written statement contended qua, after, the demise of late Shri Tarlochan Singh, rather defendant No.4 inheriting the business, and, hers running it uptill the month of September, 2017, and, thereafter defendant No.1, and, his younger brother one Ajit Pal Singh mannning the business from the suit premises. It is also contended in the written statement, that, the aforesaid manner of running of business, from, the suit premises by defendant No.1, and, his younger brother Ajil Pal Singh being a sequel, to an apposite family settlement, whose making, however, is contended, to be resisted by the plaintiff.

(2.) During the pendency of the apposite Civil Suit before the learned trial Court, the plaintiff cast an application, under the provisions of Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC, wherein, he canvassed, for, affording vis-a-vis him, the reliefs of temporary ad-interim injunction. Though, the affording of the aforesaid relief vis-a-vis the plaintiff, was, vehemently resisted by the defendants, yet both the learned Court below afforded vis-a-vis the plaintiff, the relief of temporary ad-interim mandatory injunction. Now, the defendants/petitioners herein being aggrieved therefrom, hence, institute the instant petition before this Court.

(3.) The merit worthiness, of, the concurrent pronouncements recorded by both the learned Courts below, would be tested on the anvil, of both, bearing or not bearing in mind the trite principles expostulated, in a verdict rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case titled as Mohd. Mehtab Khan and others vs. Khushnuma Ibrahim Khan and others, (2013) 9 SCC 221, the relevant paragraphs No. 18 & 19 whereof are reproduced hereinafter:-