LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Nischit C. Jain (business)     16 September 2009

permanent injuction suit

Whether court have power to dismiss suit for permenant injuction when the plaintiff is not in possession of property since purchase of property in 1973. Whether it is true that possession is subject matter for suit of permenant injuction?


 8 Replies

Y V Vishweshwar Rao (Advocate )     16 September 2009

The Possession is the  basis   Suiit &  Decree for permanent injunction

If the Plaintiff is not in possesison of the Suit propertyt  -PI  Decree can not be granted !


gfhgfh (hfh)     16 September 2009

sumtimes even if d plaintiff is nt in possession.. coust can proceed with the issue.. like in case of lease.. tenancy. wrongful dispossession

N.Ramakrishnan (Advocate/ Senior Partner)     17 September 2009

Dear Mr. Jain,

A person cannot sue for Permanant Injunction regarding possession if he is not in possession of the property. However, if he was otherwise dispossessed after the filing of the suit the same can be proceeded with and the plaintiff can also move for restoration of possession on the ground of wrongful dispossession during the pendency of the suit.


Ramakrishnan, ADV


Deekshitulu.V.S.R (B.Sc, B.L)     20 September 2009

In a suit for permanent injunction question of possession is crucial. If the plaintiff fails to prove possession of property as on date of suit, the suit will fail. Incidentally the court will go into the question of title but tat is not relevant as far as question of posession  comes into enquiry. Title to property is difference from being in possession of property

Jaswant Singh (Lawyer)     21 September 2009

Relevancy of possession of the property depend upon the nature of the relief sought in injunction matter. It may be permanant injunction or mandatory injunction

Shree. ( Advocate.)     22 September 2009

Dear All,

Supreme Court in Anathula Sudhakar v.P.Buchi Reddy (dead) by LR’s and others, AIR 2008 SC 2033 held;
“To summarize, the position in regard to suits for prohibitory injunction relating to immovable property, is as under:
(a) Where a cloud is raised over plaintiff's title and he does not have
possession, a suit for declaration and possession, with or without a
consequential injunction, is the remedy. Where the plaintiff's title is not in dispute or under a cloud, but he is out of possession, he has to sue for possession with a consequential injunction. Where there is merely an interference with plaintiff's lawful possession or threat of dispossession, it is sufficient to sue for an injunction simpliciter.
(b) As a suit for injunction simpliciter is concerned only with possession, normally the issue of title will not be directly and substantially in issue. The prayer for injunction will be decided with reference to the finding on possession. But in cases where de jure possession has to be established on the basis of title to the property, as in the case of vacant sites, the issue of title may directly and substantially arise for consideration, as without a
finding thereon, it will not be possible to decide the issue of possession. (c) But a finding on title cannot be recorded in a suit for injunction, unless there are necessary pleadings and appropriate issue regarding title [either specific, or implied as noticed in Annaimuthu Thevar v. Alagammal (AIR
2005 SC 4004)]. Where the averments regarding title are absent in a plaint and where there is no issue relating to title, the court will not investigate orexamine or render a finding on a question of title, in a suit for injunction.
Even where there are necessary pleadings and issue, if the matter involves complicated questions of fact and law relating to title, the court will relegate the parties to the remedy by way of comprehensive suit for declaration of title, instead of deciding the issue in a suit for mere injunction. (d) Where there are necessary pleadings regarding title, and appropriate issue relating to title on which parties lead evidence, if the matter involved is simple and straight-forward, the court may decide upon the issue regarding
title, even in a suit for injunction. But such cases, are the exception to the normal rule that question of title will not be decided in suits for injunction. But persons having clear title and possession suing for injunction, should not be driven to the costlier and more cumbersome remedy of a suit fordeclaration, merely because some meddler vexatiously or wrongfully makes a claim or tries to encroach upon his property. The court should use its discretion carefully to identify cases where it will enquire into title and cases where it will refer to plaintiff to a more comprehensive declaratory suit, depending upon the facts of the case.”

Vara Prasad (Middle Management)     03 April 2012


what is the remedy if the seller after receiving full consideration, having not registered the deed of sale seeks possesion ?

Y V Vishweshwar Rao (Advocate )     05 April 2012

Dear Vara Prasad !     You have to file for Specific Performance  - for Regd sale  Deed and Possession !

Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register