SBCMA No.146/08 Sohan Lal & Anr. Vs. Bansi Lal 1 S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.146/2008 Sohan Lal & Anr. Vs. Bansi Lal DATE OF ORDER : - 10.11.2008 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.M.D. Boob,for the appellants. Mr.J.P. Chhangani, for the respondent. <><><> Heard learned counsel for the parties. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the appellant-plaintiffs themselves gave the property in question to the respondent-defendant and that too, for the purpose of putting on the building materials which can be used only for giving on rent basis to the others and there was earlier round of litigation wherein in second appeal, this Court has already passed the order that the appellant shall not dispossess the respondent-defendant without following due process of law. The appellant contends that the licencee has no right in the property and Hon'ble Apex Court held that even SBCMA No.146/08 Sohan Lal & Anr. Vs. Bansi Lal 2 force can be used to remove the licensee by the licenser. It is also submitted that this Court in the case of Smt. Shakuntala Vs. Union of India & Ors, after considering 27 judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court and few judgments of this Court held that licence does not create any right in the property in favour of the grantee. In view of the above reason, the appellant is entitled to seek immediate possession by way of interim mandatory injunction restraining the defendant from doing the business of the building material from the plot in question and also take possession with the help of the Court's order that may be of interim nature. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the facts of the case. The appellants' own case is that there is order passed in the second appeal between the parties for this very property that the appellant shall not be entitled to dispossess the defendant without following due process of law, then by adopting another mode, the appellant cannot seek possession from the respondent-defendant and the SBCMA No.146/08 Sohan Lal & Anr. Vs. Bansi Lal 3 appellant can take possession of the property in dispute only by following due process of law. The appellant could not explain how the order passed in second appeal can be nullified in this way by obtaining the interim mandatory injunction for the property on the ground that in residential area, there cannot be commercial activities, which is going on because of the reason that according to the appellant himself, the property was given to the defendant for putting on the building material which can be used for giving on hire only. The appellants are also seeking interim relief which can be granted in the suit and in the present facts and circumstances of the case, granting relief to the appellant would amount to decreeing the suit itself without giving opportunity to the respondent-defendant, that too when the second appeal is pending in this Court with respect to the claims of the parties involving the same property. In view of the above reason, and particularly the binding order which has not been challenged by the appellants passed in second appeal that the appellant shall SBCMA No.146/08 Sohan Lal & Anr. Vs. Bansi Lal 4 not dispossess the respondent-defendant without following due process of law, I do not think it proper that the above judgments cited by the learned counsel for the appellants can be any help to the appellants and therefore, there is no merit in this appeal and the same is hereby dismissed. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. Praveen