Civil revision against reversal of an interim injunction granted in a possession-based suit. The appellate court had found no prima facie case amid pending title suits between the parties. The revision was dismissed and the suit transferred for trial alongside the related suits by common judgment.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
C.R.P.No.4552 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 21.11.2024
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN
C.R.P.No.4552 of 2024
and C.M.P.No.25351 of 2024
1.P.Sellamuthu
2.Rani
.. Petitioners
Versus
1.S.Shanmugavel 2.L.Maheshkumar 3.S.Maliga 4.A.Loganathan 5.S.Sivalingam .. Respondents
Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the order passed in CMA No.5/2023 on the file of IV Additional Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore reversing the order passed in IA No.2/2022 in OS No.1123/2022 on the file of Learned Principal District Munsif, Coimbatore.
For Petitioner : Ms.Haritha
For Respondents : Mr.C.R.Prasanan
ORDER
1/10
C.R.P.No.4552 of 2024
This civil revision petition arises against the order passed by the learned IV Additional Subordinate Court at Coimbatore in CMA.No.5 of 2023 dated 11.01.2024 in reversing the order and decreetal order of the learned Principal District Munsif at Coimbatore in I.A.No.2 of 2022 in O.S.No.1123 of 2022 dated 21.11.2022 and thereby dismissing the application for injunction.
the defendants from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property, which is alleged to be in possession of the plaintiffs. Though it is a suit for have injunction, based on alleged lawful possession of the plaintiffs. They have also pleaded title to the property.
On the death of Periyasamy Gounder, the two daughters executed a
2/10
C.R.P.No.4552 of 2024
relinquishment deed in favour of Santhalingam. Since Santhalingam became the owner of the property, he executed a sale deed in favour of the plaintiffs on 20.03.2012. On 06.01.2014, finding that there has been some error in the deed, a power of attorney of the said Santhalingam, namely, one Ramalingam executed a rectification deed. This document was registered on 06.06.2014. On account of the interference in possession and denial of title, the plaintiffs presented O.S.No.358 of 2014 on the file of the learned V Additional District Judge at Coimbatore. He pleaded that despite the suit, the defendants were attempting to dispossess them from the property and hence, the aforesaid suit for injunction.
3/10
C.R.P.No.4552 of 2024
Gounder was already dead and gone. They also pleaded that a suit had been filed by Santhalingam, claiming title in O.S.No.122 of 2011. They further pleaded that the defendants in the present suit had filed a suit in O.S.No.415 of 2014 for declaration that the sale deed dated 23.12.2012 allegedly executed by Santhalingam in favour of the plaintiffs is null and void and not binding on them. They had also sought for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from alienating or encumbering the property in any manner in that suit.
4/10
C.R.P.No.4552 of 2024
produced any title deed in O.S.No.122 of 2011 and that, since the suits are already pending before the learned District Judge, the learned District Munsif ought not to entertain the suit.
for interim injunction restraining the respondents herein from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property. This application was received in I.A.No.2 of 2022.
presented by them in the written statement.
Ex.R1 to Ex.R85. Neither the parties entered the witnesses box in order to give their oral evidence.
decided that there was a prima facie case in favour of the plaintiffs and
5/10
C.R.P.No.4552 of 2024
granted an injunction. Aggrieved by the said order, a civil miscellaneous appeal was preferred before the IV Additional Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore in CMA.No.5 of 2023 by the defendants 1 to 4.
title and had left it go for default. Not wanting to be left out of the litigation
6/10
C.R.P.No.4552 of 2024
game, the plaintiffs have also filed a suit for declaration and injunction and that too is pending before the learned V Additional District Judge, Coimbatore. When such is the consideration, the issue of making out a prima facie case and that too, eight years after the presentation of the suit, challenging their title cannot arise at all.
dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. The order of the learned IV Additional Subordinate Judge at
7/10
C.R.P.No.4552 of 2024
Coimbatore in CMA.No.5 of 2023 dated 11.01.2024 in reversing the order and decretal order of the learned Principal District Munsif at Coimbatore in I.A.No.2 of 2022 in O.S.No.1123 of 2022 dated 21.11.2022 stands confirmed.
21.11.2024
8/10
C.R.P.No.4552 of 2024
nl
Index : yes/no Speaking order/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation : yes/no
To
9/10
C.R.P.No.4552 of 2024
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
nl
C.R.P.No.4552 of 2024
21.11.2024
10/10
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the plaintiffs made out a prima facie case for interim injunction where serious disputes over title and possession are pending in cross-suits.
Whether the lower appellate court's dismissal of the injunction application should be interfered with under Article 227.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
P.Sellamuthu
Rani
S.Shanmugavel
L.Maheshkumar
S.Maliga
A.Loganathan
V.Lakshminarayanan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
