Can a co-owner without exclusive possession seek a permanent injunction in absence of partition?

Affirming appellate judgment, the High Court holds that joint ownership and lack of partition preclude an injunction suit by one co-owner, upholding established principle in property disputes.

 

Summary

Category Data
Case Name RSA/44/2019 of GURVAIL SINGH Vs JAGPREET SINGH AND ANR
CNR PHHC011473192018
Decision Date 01-09-2025
Disposal Nature DISMISSED
Judgment Author MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN
Court High Court of Punjab and Haryana
Bench Single-Judge Bench
Precedent Value Affirms existing precedent
Overrules / Affirms Affirms first appellate court judgment
Questions of Law No substantial question of law arose
Ratio Decidendi Where land remains jointly owned and no partition has taken place, a co-owner who admits lack of exclusive possession cannot maintain a suit for permanent injunction against fellow co-owners. Evidence of joint possession and absence of partition bars injunctive relief.
Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court Admission in cross-examination of joint possession; absence of any partition decree.
Facts as Summarised by the Court Plaintiff claimed joint ownership with co-sharers and alleged a sale deed by his brother to be void; defendants asserted joint rights and challenged that sale deed in separate proceedings; trial court granted injunction, appellate court reversed.

Summary of Legal Reasoning

  1. The First Appellate Court’s finding on the dismissal of the separate suit challenging the sale deed was noted.
  2. Plaintiff’s own admission in cross-examination confirmed joint ownership and absence of exclusive possession.
  3. In absence of any partition decree, a single co-owner cannot claim injunctive relief against other co-owners.
  4. No error was found in the appellate court’s reversal of the trial court’s decree; thus the appeal was dismissed.

Arguments by the Parties

Petitioner (Plaintiff-Appellant):

  • Relied on khasra girdwari entries (Ex.P2, Ex.P3) showing possession in his favor.
  • Contended trial court correctly decreed permanent injunction.

Respondents (Defendant-Respondents):

  • Asserted that the land was joint property of all co-sharers including themselves.
  • Pointed to the pending challenge to the sale deed in separate suit and denied plaintiff’s exclusive possession.
  • Maintained that absence of partition barred maintenance of injunction suit.

Factual Background

Plaintiff-appellant filed a suit for permanent injunction claiming joint title and possession of the suit land, alleging a sale deed by his deceased brother was void. Defendant-respondents denied exclusive title of the plaintiff, asserting joint ownership and co-possession, and had challenged the sale deed in a separate suit. The trial court granted the injunction, but the First Appellate Court reversed that decree. The present second appeal challenged the appellate court’s decision.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Comments

No comments to show.