filed the I.A.No.175 of 2010 for granting
police aid on the ground that the order of ad-interim injunction could not be
implemented as the petitioners involved in violating it.
In particular the petitioner has not filed any document to show that the
injunction granted by this Court is being violated or the respondents damaged
It is the case of the respondents that
they did not trespass into suit schedule property before or after the injunction
is granted. What that is the case of the respondents, this Court feels that no
prejudice would be caused to the respondents if the police aid is granted to
implement the order of this Court."
the Court below granted the police aid
aggrieved by which the present C.R.P. has been filed
However, whereas great caution is to be taken for granting ex
parte ad-interim injunction equal measures are to be taken while granting police
aid to enforce that order.
Under the guise of an order of ad-interim injunction
and also the corresponding police aid granted there may be a possibility of
vacating from the property in the litigation a person who is in actual
possession of the property as of right.
Therefore, whenever such order of
granting police aid is resisted it is advisable to hear both the parties to the
litigation and dispose of the petition filed for interim injunction pending
disposal of the main proceedings itself.
Further some times question of
identity of the property in dispute arises. Thereby unless there is clear
identity of the property in dispute mere granting of Police aid would not be
In such case, an Advocate Commissioner is to be appointed necessarily
to localize the property and only subject to the localization of the properties,
necessary Police aid can be granted or both the Police aid and localization of
the property can be granted s