Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

19. Notice was initially tried to be served through registered post and process server of the Court upon the petitioner but contradictory reports were returned therefore substituted service was affected and such service was found sufficient on the defendant/ petitioner. The defendant filed objections to the application for temporary injunction and written statement in the said Suit which was duly considered by the Trial Court and the learned Trial Court after considering the facts and documentary evidence placed on record came to the conclusion that the plaintiff i.e. the respondent no.3 had been able to establish a prima-facie case in his favour for grant of interim injunction. Hence the order dated 28.01.2014 was passed injuncting the defendant/ petitioner from interfering and forcibly taking possession of the house in question or trying to sell it off during the pendency of the Suit. The petitioner thereafter filed an Appeal and again documentary evidence was considered by the Appellate Court and it found no perversity or illegality in the order dated 28.01.2014 and eventually rejected the Appeal by its order dated 25.10.2019.