As per case facts, the Appellant, a bonafide purchaser, resided in a house built on land purchased in 1996 for over two decades. An eviction notice in 2019, stemming from ... an order in an earlier case where the Appellant was not a party, led to a Writ Petition challenging its legality. While a prior Writ Court order allowed a post-decisional hearing, the District Magistrate upheld the eviction. The Appellant filed a new Writ Petition, but the Writ Court dismissed the interim relief application, noting the eviction had already occurred and applied estoppel. The question arose whether the Writ Court was justified in dismissing the interim relief on grounds of completed eviction and estoppel without assessing the merits or the "triple test." Finally, the High Court found the Appellant had a strong *prima facie* case, observing non-application of mind by the District Magistrate and holding that the Writ Court's estoppel finding was premature. It ruled that denying interim relief, especially with belongings locked inside, caused irreparable injury and violated the Right to Life, setting aside the Writ Court's order and restoring *status quo ante*.