In this Article 227 writ petition, the Supreme Court addressed a request for directions to lower courts regarding an injunction application. The Court dismissed the petition, noting insufficient proof of proper service of summons on defendants.
None. The petition was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 36
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 9245 of 2018
Petitioner :- Ram Adhar
Respondent :- Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division ) Court No. 14 District Azamgarh And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Bharti Mishra
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.
Prayer in the present petition is to issue a direction to the court below to decide temporary injunction application.
The record indicates that the suit was instituted on 12.10.2018 when the court below has issued notices upon the defendants noticing the fact that no injunction can be granted in absence of the defendants. There is nothing on record to indicate as to whether the plaintiff has taken steps for service of summons upon the defendants. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the defendants are served through Amin, who has effected notices upon them, is misconceived.
No positive direction, as such, can be given. The present petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 17.12.2018 Pratima
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a positive direction can be issued to the court below to decide a temporary injunction application where defendants have not been properly served.
Ram Adhar
Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) Court No. 14 District Azamgarh
Sunita Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
