Disposed

Ambuja Cements Limited v. State of Raj. and Ors.

Rajasthan HC12 May 2014CW/3286/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The bench issued directions regarding the finalization of an application for temporary injunction pending in the trial court. It fixed dates for filing reply and rejoinder and ordered the trial court to decide the matter by 30.05.2014, while extending an interim stay.

What did the court decide?

Fixed dates for filing rejoinder and ruling by trial court by 30.05.2014; interim stay extended till disposal.

Ambuja Cements Limited Vs State of Raj. and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

¶3

AT JODHPUR

¶4

: O R D E R :

¶5

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3286/2014

¶6

Ambuja Cements Limited vs.

¶7

The State of Rajasthan & Ors.

¶8

Date of Order :: 12.05.2014

¶9

PRESENT

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

¶11

Dr. Abhishek Singhvi, Sr. Advocate with ) for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Bhandari ) Mr. M.S. Singhvi, Sr. Advocate with ) Mr. Varun Singhvi )

¶12

Ms. Suman Porwal, Dy.G.C. ) for the respondents. ----

¶13

BY THE COURT:

¶14

This petition is directed against the order dated 22.04.2014 passed by the trial court, whereby the trial court fixed next date as 12.05.2014 for filing of reply to the application under Order XXXIX, Rule 1 and 2 CPC ('application') and rejected the prayer for ad interim injunction.

¶15

It is pointed out by learned counsel for the respondents on instructions that the reply to the application is being filed today before the trial court.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner would require a week's time for the purpose of filing rejoinder to the said reply, in case the same is in fact presented today and the trial court may be directed to hear and decide the application expeditiously and the petitioner may be protected till such time that the application is decided.

¶17

¶18

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the prayers in the petition have been made seeking a direction to the trial court to hear the application before 05.05.2014 and in the alternate a restrain against the respondents from taking any coercive step against the petitioner till the decision of the application for temporary injunction, though the first prayer has been rendered infructuous, the alternative prayer can be granted, if a schedule is fixed before the trial court, so as to protect the interest of the respondents.

¶19

This Court while issuing notices to the respondents on 06.05.2014 had directed the respondents not to take steps prejudicial to the interest of the petitioner in pursuance of notice dated 18.02.2014 (Annexure – 12) till today.

¶20

In the facts and circumstances of the case, whereby the reply to the application is proposed to be filed today, it would be appropriate to fix a date for the petitioner to file rejoinder and thereafter, the trial court to decide the application under Order XXXIX, Rule 1 and 2 CPC itself within a specific time frame, so as to put an end to the present controversy, which revolves around the issue as to whether the trial court should have granted ad interim injunction in the present proceedings.

¶21

Consequently, the present petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

¶22

If the reply is filed by the respondent today before the trial court, the petitioner shall file its rejoinder by 19.05.2014;

¶23

In case the reply is not filed today, the same shall be filed by the respondents by 19.05.2014 and the

¶24

¶25

petitioner would file the rejoinder by 26.05.2014;

¶26

The trial court is thereafter directed to hear the application under Order XXXIX, Rule 1 and 2 CPC on 30.05.2014 and decide the same expeditiously;

¶27

Till such time that the application is decided by the trial court, the ad interim order passed by this Court on 06.05.2014 restraining the respondents not to take any steps prejudicial to the interest of the petitioner in pursuance of notice dated 18.02.2014 (Annexure – 12) shall remain in force.

¶28

The stay petition also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶29

(ARUN BHANSALI), J.

¶30

PKS-17

Ambuja Cements Limited v. State of Raj. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ambuja Cements Limited v. State of Raj. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prabhu Lal and Ors. Vs Jamna Lal and Ors.

Heera Lal Vs Jeth Mal

Gopi Ram and Ors. Vs Lrs.of Ramkaran

Smt.Rekha Vs Jamna Lal

Krapesh Lakhara Vs Kamla and Ors.

Narayan Prasad Vs Gauri Shanker and Ors.