Ravi S. Dhavan, J. - (1.) THIS is one of those matters where strict logic of law may not do justice to issue which arise out of the suit which is pending. This court cannot help but recall what the great jurist Mr. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, late Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, comments on the very first page of his book. The Common Law - -"The life of the law has not been logic: it has been experience". The petitioner is without parents and the gentleman who is supposed to have adopted her died. She sought an action by way of a suit as a protective measure to safeguard herself from being ousted from the suit premises, otherwise than in accordance with law. The suit premises are partly residential and partly non -residential. In the suit she made a claim to the effect that her father died before she was born. Her mother also died. She was brought up from the age of ten by one Dr. Kunwar Prakash Sharma. He also died in 1985. The injunction application was opposed by the respondents Nos. 3 and 4. It was contended that the petitioner had no status, that she was not the heir of the aforesaid Dr. Sharma, nor had been adopted by him at any stage.
(2.) THE trial court denied her the temporary injunction and denied her relief from dispossession from the accommodation in dispute. In appeal, before the Second Additional Judge, Saharanpur the order of the trial court was upheld. One aspect needs to be kept in mind that it was a temporary injunction which was being considered pending decision of the suit on merits and in 'reference to the present controversy two circumstances ought to have been taken into account (a) whether the plaintiff had a prima facie case; and (b) the balance of convenience, if the injunction was granted or denied.
(3.) CERTAIN aspects raised in her pleadings and while arguing the matter before the two courts below ought to have been considered. The plaintiff had lost both her parents and the question of producing evidence of the parents that she had been given in adoption was not possible. Again her foster parent who had adopted her also was not available for the same reason that her parents was not available. He died in 1985. But this alone would not mean that she had not been adopted. The fact that she had resided with her foster parent was an aspect which could not be ignored.;