https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283044 In a suit for recovery of possession based on trespass or encroachment, the court may not refuse possession and substitute damages or compensation where the owner has established title and the right to recover the land. The distinction between substantive possession claims and cases where mandatory injunction is only incidental means Section 54 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877 does not permit compulsory purchase of the plaintiff's land through compensation. Mere delay, laches, acquiescence, or hardship to the trespasser will not defeat relief unless a clear equitable estoppel is proved; on the facts noted, no such bar existed and possession with consequential relief followed. en-us Thu, 02 Jul 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Sep 2019 16:15:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283044 In a suit for recovery of possession based on trespass or encroachment, the court may not refuse possession and substitute damages or compensation where the owner has established title and the right to recover the land. The distinction between substantive possession claims and cases where mandatory injunction is only incidental means Section 54 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877 does not permit compulsory purchase of the plaintiff's land through compensation. Mere delay, laches, acquiescence, or hardship to the trespasser will not defeat relief unless a clear equitable estoppel is proved; on the facts noted, no such bar existed and possession with consequential relief followed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 02 Jul 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283044