WPMS No. 1930 of 2010 Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J. Mr. Kurban Ali, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.C. Arya, Brief Holder for the State. Mr. H.S. Rawal, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Rajendra Kotiyal, Advocate for respondent Nos. 2, 4, 5 and 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, the Court finds that a prima-facie case is not made out for grant of temporary injunction. Admittedly, the petitioner executed a sale deed in favour of the defendant. It is alleged that the balance amount of Rs. 1 lac had not been paid by the defendant, as a result, possession was not given to the defendant. On the other hand, the defendant contends that possession had already been taken which fact has been considered by the trial court and, accordingly, the temporary injunction was refused. The fact as to who is in possession is not the relevant consideration at this stage. What is relevant is the fact that the plaintiff had admitted that he had executed a registered sale deed in favour of the defendant. The moment, the plaintiff executed the sale deed, he is divested of his title and, consequently, a case for temporary induction is not made out. The writ petition fails and is dismissed. (Tarun Agarwala, J.) Dated 18.11.2010 Shiv