Section 36, 37 – Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Section 9 -- Injunction simplicitor – Maintainability of -- Ratio of the judgment passed in Anathula Sudhakar’s case, Civil Appeal No.6191 of 2001, dated 25.03.2008 passed by the Supreme Court is that the relief of injunction simplicitor cannot be sought by a person whose title over the property is in dispute -- Plaintiffs’ title over the suit property was not in dispute, though the defendants made a deplorable attempt to dispute the same by concealing relevant facts from the Court – Therefore, the defendants cannot raise any plea based upon the judgment.

(P&H HC) Reserved on 29.10.2022 Decided on: 04.11.2022

Sections 10, 16 (c), 20, 21, 22, 23 – Specific performance of agreement – Alternative relief of refund -- Agreement of sale provided that in the event the permission was not obtained within 75 days, the purchaser shall be entitled to get back his advance money paid after 75 days but not later than 90 days under any circumstances – Defendant/ owner terminated the agreement on 12th April 1982 stating therein that permission from the ULC Authorities could not be obtained – Plaintiff/ Purchaser did not take any step till 19th February 1984 -- Only after the ULC permission was granted on 7th February 1984, the plaintiff had issued a legal notice to the defendant on 19th February 1984 – High Court denied the relief for specific performance to the plaintiff, it has directed the respondents-defendants to refund the advance amount of Rs.15,000/- along with accrued interest or a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- in all – Defendant had, in fact, received an amount of Rs.15,000/- as early as 1978, Supreme Court directed the respondents-defendants to pay an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- to the appellants-plaintiffs within a period of 3 months.

(SC) Decided on : 27.09.2022

Section 34, 37, 38 -- Suit for declaration and permanent injunction – Injunction against true owner -- Plaintiff failed to get any declaratory relief and the defendant No.1 is held to be a true and absolute owner on the basis of the registered sale deed on payment of full sale consideration thereafter the plaintiff’s possession cannot be said to be “lawful possession” -- Plaintiff is not entitled to any permanent injunction against the true owner.

(SC) Decided on: 03.03.2022

Section 34, 37, 38 -- Substantive relief – Consequential relief -- Once the plaintiff has failed to get any substantive relief of cancellation of the sale deed and failed to get any declaratory relief, relief of injunction can be said to be a consequential relief must fail.

(SC) Decided on: 03.03.2022

Section 34, 37, 38 -- Suit for declaration -- Consequential relief of injunction – Injunction against true owner -- It is not a suit for declaration simpliciter, it is a suit for declaration with a further relief -- Injunction may be granted even against the true owner of the property, only when the person seeking the relief is in lawful possession and enjoyment of the property and also legally entitled to be in possession, not to disposes him, except in due process of law -- Once the rights of the parties are adjudicated and the defendant No.1 is held to be the true owner on the basis of the registered sale deed and on payment of full sale consideration, it can be said that due process of law has been followed and thereafter the plaintiff is not entitled to any permanent injunction against the true owner.

(SC) Decided on: 03.03.2022