Temporary injunction requires prima facie proof of possession and identifiable property boundaries.

The petitioner-plaintiff filed O.S. No. 122 of 2021 seeking a permanent injunction against the respondents-defendants in respect of agricultural property and applied for a temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

The Trial Court rejected the application, finding that the petitioner had not produced documents establishing the property’s boundaries or how it came to him.

The First Appellate Court affirmed the rejection, noting disputes over the property and insufficient material supporting the petitioner’s possession and claim.

The petitioner challenged both orders under Article 227 of the Constitution.

Under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, temporary injunctive relief requires the applicant to establish a prima facie case, that the balance of convenience favours the applicant, and that refusal of relief would cause irreparable loss or injury.

The judgment also considered the petitioner’s burden to provide material supporting possession and identification of the suit property.

The courts below found that the petitioner relied on revenue records but had not produced other sufficient material establishing possession, the property’s boundaries, or its identification; the First Appellate Court also noted the absence of a boundary certificate and the existence of rival claims.

In light of those evidentiary gaps, the High Court concluded that the petitioner had not established a prima facie case or shown that the balance of convenience favoured an injunction. It found no ground to interfere with the concurrent decisions under Article 227.