TARUN KUMAR GUPTA, J. - (1.) THIS is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India directed against judgment and order dated 27th of September, 2010 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 3rd Court, Howrah in Misc. Appeal No.187 of 2008.
(2.) THE O. P. No.1 being plaintiff filed Title suit No.124 of 2005 alleging that the public religious institution was established long back having a temple with idols of god in a plot of land comprising six decimals in Dag No.60. Kunta Rani Das and Srinibas Das gifted further 1 1/2 decimals of land in plot No.61 adjacent to said six decimals of land in plot No.60. Defendant Nos. 1, 2 and 3 allegedly purchased a portion of plot Nos. 62, 63 and 61 respectively without having any right, title and interest over the land of plaintiff which is fully described in schedule A. They were trying to get electric connection through plaintiff's A schedule land. Accordingly, plaintiff filed said suit praying for declaring the plaintiff as the owner of A schedule property with a permanent injunction restraining defendants from taking any electric line through A schedule property. The O. P. No.1 plaintiff filed an application for temporary injunction against private defendants namely petitioner defendant No.1 and O. P. Nos. 2 and 3 being defendant Nos. 2 and 3 and O. P. No. 4 being the district engineer, CESC, Howrah. The present petitioner being defendant No.1 appeared and started to contest the suit by filing written statement as well as written objection against the injunction petition. Petitioner defendant No.1 took the plea that suit plot No.60 did not belong to plaintiff and rather it belonged to District School Board, Howrah whereupon a school was instituted and running. It was further case that plaintiff deity was gifted 1 1/2 decimals of land in plot No.61 and that plaintiff had no right, title and interest over any portion of plot No.60 rather the petitioner defendant No.1 and others used said land as common passage for long. The plaintiff is not entitled to get any order of injunction.
(3.) AFTER contested hearing learned trial court rejected the petition for injunction by an order dated 18th of September, 2008.;