AIROnline 2025 SC 143

Specific Relief Act (47 of 1963) , S.38— Suit for perpetual injunction – Dismissal of – Legality – Sale Deed did not reflect that original owner had retained a portion of land as pleaded by defendants , after selling 21 cents to plaintiff – Defendants claimed that under a settlement deed, disputed property stood vested in Gram Panchayat – High Court ought to have accepted plaintiff’s case by appreciating documents of both parties, who claimed through the original owner and the description of schedule property in sale deed by juxtaposing same with Commissioner’s Report and plan drawn to sketch – Non-suiting plaintiff on the ground that suit for mere injunction was illegal, when that was not in issue before trial court , was unsustainable – High Court erred in upsetting findings of fact which did not suffer from perversity.
AIROnline 2022 Mad 1358-ReversedSAMD No. 437/2010 dated 04.03.2022 (Mad)-Reversed

(Para 10
11)

…..