A review application was filed challenging an ex-parte ad interim injunction. The court dismissed the review prayer as the original interim order was not necessary to review. The original interim injunction remains effective.
Review of the order dated 06.12.2021 is dismissed; the earlier interim injunction order remains operational.
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.
| SL. No |
Date | Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures |
COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS |
|---|---|---|---|
| MCC No. 02 of 2021 In WPMS No.2551 of 2021 Shri S.K.Mishra, J. Mr. Sagar Kothari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Vinay Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent. Heard learned counsel for the review- applicant/respondent and learned counsel for the petitioner appearing in the writ application, who is opposite party in the review application. This Court has passed the following orders: “Hence, an order of ex-parte ad interim injunction is issued, restraining the respondent from evicting the present petitioner from the property in question without following the procedure established by law and also from alienating the property to any third person without the permission of the 2ndAddl. Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) Dehradun, in whose court, the case is pending, and the consent of the petitioner till 30.12.2021. The learned 2ndAddl. Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) Dehradun, shall consider the matter of injunctions and passed appropriate orders. The petitioner shall file a certified copy of this order by filing an application for advancement of the case on 07.12.2021.” |
| It is brought to the notice of this |
|---|
| Court that on 06.12.2021, the 2ndCivil |
| Judge (S/D), Dehradun has passed an interim order but the application for temporary injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is still pending in that Court. In that view of the matter, the review- applicant may file his counter affidavit and drawing all the facts within a period of two weeks before the before the 2ndCivil Judge |
| (S/D), Dehradun, by filing appropriate objection to the application filed by the opposite party under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 and the matter shall be heard and disposed of by the 2ndAdditional Civil Judge (S/D), Dehradun on merit. There is no need to review the order passed by this Court. This review application is accordingly dismissed. Urgent certified copy of this order be provided to the learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of the day, as per rules. (S.K.Mishra,J.) 23.12.2021 KKS |
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shri S.K.Mishra
The Review-Aplicant/Respondent
S.K. Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
