The High Court dismissed the revisional application against a lower court order rejecting a prayer for police help to enforce an ad-interim injunction, finding no warrant for police assistance based on available pleadings.
The learning court below is directed to dispose of the application for temporary injunction expeditiously.
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.
10.08.2023 Sl. No.3(DL) srm
C.O. No. 1125 of 2023
Hasim Jamadar Versus
Banshi Sk. & Ors.
Mr. M.P. Gupta, Mr. Dilip Kumar Saila, Mr. Supriya Mahajan
…for the Petitioner.
This Court is not inclined to interfere with the order dated January 19, 2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 4th Court at Howrah, in Title Suit No.1206 of 2018.
By the order impugned, the learned court below rejected the second application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The petitioner’s prayer for implementation of the ad-interim order with police help was refused. The grounds for rejection were as follows:
2
again an application was filed alleging violation of the order of ad interim injunction.
The supplementary affidavit, which has been filed, indicates that the petitioner has relied upon communication and letters since 2018. Such letters indicate violation of the adinterim order. Thereafter, the prayer for implementation of the ad interim order of injunction with police help, was refused in 2019. After a lapse of 4 years again, by relying on some GD entries, the petitioner prayed for implementation of the ad interim order of injunction with police help.
The application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure does not disclose how and by what means, the defendants had violated the order of ad interim injunction. By an ad interim injunction, the defendants were restrained from
3
disturbing the possession of the plaintiff in respect of the suit property and further restrained from changing the nature and character of the property. There is nothing in the pleadings which would indicate that the defendants had committed any acts of violation of the order of ad-interim injunction.
Hence, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned court below. It was a matter of discretion of the court. The court refused to exercise such discretion. The pleadings and facts which were available before the court, did not justify grant of an order of implementation of the ad-interim order with the help of the police. According to the court, such order could not be passed on the mere asking. This court does not find the order to be either preserved or unreasoned.
The learned court below is directed to dispose of the application for temporary injunction expeditiously.
The revisional application is, thus, disposed of.
There will be, however, no order as to costs.
Parties are to act on the basis of the server copy of this
order.
(Shampa Sarkar, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the lower court's refusal to grant police help for implementation of an ad-interim injunction.
If the revisional application discloses violation of the ad-interim injunction warranting police assistance under inherent powers.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Hasim Jamadar
Banshi Sk. & Ors.
Shampa Sarkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
