P. A. CHOUDHARY, J.

( 1 ) THE two petitioners before me are defendants 5 and 6 in O. S. No. 3623 of 1980 on the file of the Second Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. They along with some others, apprehending that the plaintiffs in the aforesaid suit might apply for grant of an injunction against them re-straining them from holding any meeting on Staging any demonstration or resorting to any other form of direct action by playing musical instruments, beating of drums, using microphones, etc. , within the premises of the Reserve Bank of India, Hyderabad branch, lodged a Caveat under Section 148-A of the Civil Procedure Code with the City Civil Court. This lodgment was done on 1st Oct. , 1980. The caveat so lodged was numbered as 47 of 1980. Thereafter, the two petitioners gave notice on 8-10-1980 to the plaintiffs informing them that a Caveat had been entered against any application that the plaintiffs might move affecting the petitioners. On 27-10-1980, the plaintiffs served the two Caveators copies of their intended application for the grant of interim relief and also copies of other relevant papers and documents. The plaintiffs also informed the Caveators that they were moving their application for grant of an injunction on 28-10-1980 and the matter would be heard by the Court on that day. But on 28-10-1980 the plaintiff s I. A. No. 1303 of 1980 filed for the purpose of obtaining interim relief was not heard. On that day the I. A. was merely allotted to the second Assistant Judge. Thereafter the second Assistant Judge without giving any notice to the Cavealors, passed an order of injunction as prayed for on the 30th October, 1980 restraining the respondents to the I. A. from holding any meeting or staging any demonstrations or resorting to any other form of direction, etc. , in the premises of the Reserve Bank of India, Hyderabad branch, pending further orders on that application. Against this order of the second Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, the Cavealors filed the present C. R. P.

( 2 ) THE contention of the petitioners is that the interim orders of injunction passed by the second Assistant Judge on 30th Oct. , 1980 was null and void as it was passed without jurisdiction because it was passed contrary to the newly added provisions of Section 148-A of the Code of Civil Procedure and more particularly Sub-section (3) of that section. Section 148-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, which was inserted into the Civil Procedure Code by a recent enactment of the Parliament reads as follows :"148-A. Right to lodge a caveat: (1) Where an application is expected to be made, or has been made, in a suit or proceeding instituted, or about to be instituted, in a Court, any person claiming a right to appear before the Court on the hearing of such application may lodge a caveat in respect thereof. (2) Where a caveat has been lodged under Sub-section (1), the person by whom the caveat has been lodged (hereinafter referred to as the caveator) shall serve a notice of the caveat by registered post, acknowledgment due, on the person by whom the application has been, or is expected to be made, under Sub-section (1 ). (3) Where, after a caveat has been lodged under Sub-section (1) any application is filed in any suit or proceeding, the Court shall serve a notice of the application on the cavea-low. (4) Where a notice of any caveat has been served on the applicant, he shall forthwith furnish the caveator, at the caveator s expense, with a copy of the application made by him and also with copies of any paper or document which has been, or may be, filed by him in support of the application. (5) Where a caveat has been lodged under Sub-section (1), such caveat shall not remain in force after the expiry of ninety days from the date on which it was lodged unless the application referred to in Sub-section (1) has been made before the expiry of the said period. "

( 3 ) SUB-SECTION (1) of Section 148-A provides for the lodging of a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document