No precipitative action may be taken against the suit property for three weeks pending consideration of injunction applications.

The petitioners sought police protection against eviction from the disputed property without due process.

On 2 April 2026, the High Court directed that the property’s status be maintained pending further instructions from the police.

The petitioners later filed a civil suit seeking, among other reliefs, injunctions and restoration of a partially demolished residential structure; their application for temporary injunction remained pending before the Trial Court.

The parties assert competing claims to title under different Wills, and respondent No. 4 disputes the petitioners’ possession.

Whether the High Court should continue interim protection in the writ petition while the parties’ competing property claims and the petitioners’ injunction application are before the Trial Court.

Whether the writ petition should be disposed of while directing the Trial Court to consider the pending interim application on its merits.

The petition invoked the High Court’s jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.

The petitioners’ pending application for temporary injunction was made under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2, read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Where a complaint discloses cognizable offences, the police must register an FIR and investigate in accordance with law.

No precedent was cited, and the Court did not determine any substantive rule governing title or possession; it left the interim dispute to the Trial Court for decision on its merits.

The parties’ rival claims to title and the disputed question of possession were already before the Trial Court, which had the petitioners’ temporary-injunction application for consideration.

Given that the Trial Court had not acted on the application in light of the High Court’s earlier status quo order, the High Court considered it appropriate to direct that the application be decided expeditiously rather than determine the property dispute in the writ proceedings.

To preserve the position in the meantime, it prohibited further precipitative action for three weeks, while expressly clarifying that this was not an opinion on the merits.

It directed the Trial Court to consider the pending interim application(s) on their merits and in accordance with law, without treating the High Court’s order as expressing any view on the parties’ rival claims.

Pending applications, if any, were also disposed of.