¶1 The defendant had been wrongfully turned out of the possession of the premises under proceedings for alleged forcible entry and detainer, and at the last term of this Court a writ of-restitution was ordered. See Perry v. Tupper, 70 N. C. Rep. 538.
¶2 This action is for the same premises, and pending the action, an injunction is asked for to restrain the defendant from suing out his writ of restitution awarded at last term. And his Honor ordered the injunction to issue, and the defendant appealed. ' Nothing new has occurred-since the writ of restitution was awarded; but in this action, the plaintiffs allege that the defendant’s title papers were fraudulently obtained and it is sought to set them aside, which accounts for the action being brought while the plaintiff is in possession.
¶3 The writ of possession must, issue as a matter of course. *387 Tbe defendant having been put out of possession by an abuse of the process of the law, the law must be just to itself, as well as to the defendant, by restoring him to that of which he was wrongfully deprived. When the defendant is restored to the possession, then, and not till then, will the Court be in condition in which it can honorably to itself, pass upon the further rights of the parties. This is sufficiently explained in a case between the same parties at this term, upon a motion to rehear the order for writ of restitution at last term. And see the King v. Wilson, 30 Eng. C. L. R.; 3 Adol. & Ellis, p. 229 at 238.
¶4 There was error in the order appealed from granting the injunction.
¶5 Let this certified.
¶6 PffiR Cueiam. Order reversed.