PROVINCE OF PUNJAB Through Collector, Gujranwala And Others vs Ch.
This petition for special leave to appeal arises from a civil suit initiated by landowners challenging the government's acquisition of their property for a housing scheme in Tehsil Wazirabad, District Gujrat. The respondents sought a declaration that the acquisition was not for a public purpose and requested a permanent injunction against the government. The trial court granted a temporary injunction under the Code of Civil Procedure 1908, which was subsequently upheld by the Additional District Judge and the High Court in civil revision proceedings. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the concurrent findings of the lower courts regarding the grant of an interim injunction warranted interference by the apex court. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that the trial court's exercise of discretionary jurisdiction in granting the temporary injunction was appropriate and legally sound. The judgment reinforces the principle that the Supreme Court will generally decline to interfere with the discretionary exercise of power by trial courts regarding interlocutory orders unless a clear legal error or miscarriage of justice is demonstrated.
- Does the Supreme Court interfere with the discretionary exercise of jurisdiction by a trial court in granting a temporary injunction?
- Can a civil suit be maintained to challenge the acquisition of land for a housing scheme on the grounds that it is not for a public purpose?
- Order XXXIX Rule 1, Code of Civil Procedure 1908
- Order XXXIX Rule 2, Code of Civil Procedure 1908
ORDER
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.-- This petition is directed against the order of the High Court, dated 10th of November, 1980 whereby the petition against the interlocutory order was dismissed.
2. The facts leading to the present petition briefly are that the respondents' land in to villages in Tehsil Wazirabad, District Gujrat is sought to be acquired by the Government for a Housing Scheme.
The owners/ respondents of the land filed a joint suit in the Court of Senior Civil Judge for a declaration that their land had not been acquired for a public purpose and for a permanent injunction restraining the petitioners from acquiring the same. They also filed an application for interim stay under Order XXXIX, rules 1 and 2 of the C.P.C. The trial Court, granted temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiffs on 18-5-1977. The defendants (the present petitioners) filed an appeal against the said order, which was dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Gujranwala, on 15-11-1977. Aggrieved by this the petitioners filed a civil revision in the High Court but that also met the same fate. Hence this civil petition for special leaves to appeal.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and gone through the relevant orders. We do not consider it a fit case for interference in the exercise of its discretionary jurisdiction by the learned trial Court, which we feel has been rightly exercised. The petition is, therefore, dismissed as having no merit.