HC upholds injunction protecting possession of Shopian apple orchard
09/09/2026
SRINAGAR, Sep 8: The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has upheld a permanent prohibitory injunction protecting the possession of an apple orchard measuring 102 kanals and 13 marlas in Shopian, while clarifying that ownership of the land remains undecided.
Justice Shahzad Azeem, hearing RFA No. 27/2019 at Srinagar, dismissed the appeal challenging the June 18, 2019 judgment of the Principal District Judge, Anantnag, which had restrained the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs' possession over the orchard.
The court held that a suit seeking prohibitory injunction can be maintained on the basis of established possession even when title has not been finally decided. It noted that the disputed property was an active apple orchard and that possession could be established through evidence of cultivation, spraying, harvesting, employment of labour and transportation of produce, along with revenue records.
The court found that the plaintiffs had produced consistent evidence regarding their long-standing horticultural control over the orchard, supported by the testimony of labourers, drivers and the concerned Patwari. Revenue records showed the land in the names of the plaintiffs/vendees under self-cultivation, while the defendants failed to produce documentary evidence supporting their claim.
Rejecting the defendants' caretaker claim, the court observed that they had not produced any written authorisation from the alleged original owners and that their own witnesses had deviated from the pleaded case.
The court also rejected objections relating to the earlier injunction suit, court fee and production of additional documents, holding that the subsequent interference constituted a fresh cause of action and that the additional documents proposed by the respondents related to title, which was not required for deciding the possessory injunction.
The High Court made it clear that its judgment protects possession only and does not declare the plaintiffs as owners. It said either party remains free to institute a comprehensive suit for declaration of title and, if advised, possession.
The appeal was accordingly dismissed and the trial court's decree restraining interference with the plaintiffs' possession of the Ramnagri orchard was affirmed.
Share This Story |
|
Comment On This Story |
|
|
|
|