direction was made absolute on
16.01.2020 (hereinafter referred to as the „second injunction‟).
5. An injunction of a similar nature was granted ... 2018 seeking modification of the order dated 16.01.2020 (second
injunction) so as to enable the JD to honour the decree dated 14.05.2020.
The said modification
Rule 1 and 2 CPC for grant of
temporary injunction & interim injunction, second
application for grant of stay on the notices being issued
Mubeen Farooqi vs State Of Punjab And Others on 22 May, 2020
CWP-PIL-52
suit among others got their placements. This
triggered the filing of the second suit notwithstanding the pendency of the
earlier one having a specific direction ... arrayed as a party defendant nor any attempt made
to file another injunction application in the pending suit. In the present suit
also, the same
first and second defendants (i) for a
permanent injunction restraining the first and second defendant, their agents
and servants any person, every person claiming under ... relief as sought for in the suit, even
the bare injunction or injunction simpliciter.
35. The learned counsel for D2 would also contend that
seeking
injunction restraining the second respondent and his men claiming any
right over the petitioner son's property. On 23.12.2016, the District ... against the second respondent.
Thereafter, on 27.11.2016, the petitioner visited his son's residence, and
informed the second respondent about the injunction order
interim injunction as well as
temporary injunction against the second respondent. He further submitted
that absolutely, the first respondent is not a necessary party ... Admittedly, though the petitioner filed a suit for bare injunction
against the second respondent, he has not sought any relief for declaration
and recovery
amended by incorporating the contentions withregard to
mandatory injunction and by claiming the relief of
Mandatory Injunction on 26.07.2017.
Since the Plaintiff has contended ... outhouse, then he is not entitle for the relief of
Injunction.
Secondly, when the Plaintiff has failed to prove
that, the Defendant has encroached over
Raghunathan,
Aged about 40 years,
R/at No.432, Second Cross,
Second 'A' Main, Third stage, Third Block,
Basavshwaranagar, Bangalore ... Property, the
Plaintiffs will not be entitled for the relief of
Injunction.
Secondly, when the Plaintiffs have failed to
prove that, Defendant
defendant is illegal and for the
consequential relief of mandatory injunction directing the second
defendant to cease and desist from acting as the mathadhipathi ... management of the first defendant, and
consequential relief of mandatory injunction directing the second
defendant to handover the assets, effects, properties and affairs
