https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277532 The Plaintiff sought a permanent injunction against the Defendants to protect his possession of plot No. 358. The trial court and High Court ruled in favor of the Plaintiff based on evidence of ownership and possession, dismissing arguments related to Specific Relief Act provisions, court fees, and mis-joinder of parties. The Supreme Court upheld the lower courts' decisions, emphasizing the Plaintiff's established possession and ownership, resulting in the appeal's dismissal. en-us Tue, 27 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Dec 2018 06:50:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277532 The Plaintiff sought a permanent injunction against the Defendants to protect his possession of plot No. 358. The trial court and High Court ruled in favor of the Plaintiff based on evidence of ownership and possession, dismissing arguments related to Specific Relief Act provisions, court fees, and mis-joinder of parties. The Supreme Court upheld the lower courts' decisions, emphasizing the Plaintiff's established possession and ownership, resulting in the appeal's dismissal. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 27 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277532