SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1989 Supreme(AP) 28

A.SEETHARAM REDDY
K. Abdul Malik – Appellant
Versus
D. Shama Vali – Respondent


A. SEETARAM REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THE case of the revisionist herein is that the respondents had filed a civil suit during vacation before the Vacation Civil Judge, Kurnool, and obtained a temporary injunction. After vacation, the matter came up before the District Munsif, on the application made by the revisionist to vacate the injunction and the same was done by the District Munsif. Consequently an appeal was preferred to the learned Subordinate Judge, Adoni, who held that the District Munsif had no jurisdiction to vacate the injunction granted by the Vacation Civil Judge, Kurnool. The error is quite apparent. In asmuch as during the vacation it was certainly competent for the Vacation Civil judge to grant a temporary injunction for the vacation period which, he did, and later transmitted the record back to the court of competent jurisdiction namely the District Munsif, Adoni. Therefore, for all practical purposes, the order passed by the Vacation Civil Judgement be deemed to have been made by the District Munsif himself, which it could have done normally, but for the intervention of vacation. Hence it was certainly competent for the learned District Munsif to vacate the order of injunc



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top