https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197448 A party who invoked tenancy jurisdiction, obtained possession under the original order, and then faced reversal with restitution directed cannot secure permanent injunction to preserve that advantage. Even assuming civil suit maintainability and challenge to the tenancy forum's jurisdiction, the Court held that injunction is a discretionary equitable remedy and must be refused where it is sought to defeat restitution and retain the benefit of an earlier order. The plaintiff's attempt to use the civil court to override the reversed order was therefore rejected, and the suit was dismissed. en-us Tue, 22 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Jan 2018 16:44:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197448 A party who invoked tenancy jurisdiction, obtained possession under the original order, and then faced reversal with restitution directed cannot secure permanent injunction to preserve that advantage. Even assuming civil suit maintainability and challenge to the tenancy forum's jurisdiction, the Court held that injunction is a discretionary equitable remedy and must be refused where it is sought to defeat restitution and retain the benefit of an earlier order. The plaintiff's attempt to use the civil court to override the reversed order was therefore rejected, and the suit was dismissed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 22 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197448