TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the appellant established his possession over the suit schedule property so as to warrant grant of temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Analysis: The appellant sought interlocutory protection on the footing that he continued in possession of agricultural land. The burden lay on him to establish existing possession. The revenue records and pahanies showed the respondents' names in the possessory column. The challenge to the revenue entries had already been taken before the revenue authorities, and the appellant had also availed the statutory revision remedy. A prior temporary injunction had already been granted in the respondents' specific performance suit, where they pleaded possession. In these circumstances, the absence of any recital of delivery of possession in the agreement of sale did not, by itself, establish the appellant's continued possession or displace the revenue entries.
Conclusion: The appellant failed to prove possession and, therefore, was not entitled to temporary injunction.
Final Conclusion: The refusal of interim relief was upheld and the appeal was dismissed.
Ratio Decidendi: A party seeking temporary injunction must first establish present possession, and where revenue records and surrounding circumstances indicate possession in favour of the opposite party, interlocutory protection cannot be granted merely on a denial of delivery of possession in the underlying agreement.
TaxTMI 
