A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA, J.

1. An ad-interim exparte order of temporary injunction granted in O.S. No. 336 of 2013 on 09.01.2013 by the VIII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore, has been questioned in this writ petition.

2. The respondent/plaintiff is working as a Judicial Member in Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Branch (Bangalore). The petitioner/ defendant is the Editor, Printer and Publisher of Excise Law Times, Central Publication Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi 110003. Suit has been instituted for granting of the following reliefs:–

(a) MANDATORY INJUNCTION commanding the Defendant to tender unqualified apology to the plaintiff for having published defamatory matter captioned "E.L.T. Bureau Adds" on pages A85 and A86 of "Tit-Bits/News & Views" section of Excise Law Times Vol. 280 Part 3 dated 18th June, 2012, and to publish such apology in Excise Law Times conspicuously.

(b) PERMANENT INJUNCTION restraining the defendant, his employees, concerns, companies, agents or any person claiming through or under the defendant from printing, publishing or spreading in any manner whatsoever, whether in Excise Law Times or otherwise, any defamatory statement or material calculated to defame the plaintiff in any manner whatsoever.

(c) DAMAGES of a sum of Rs. 1 (Rupee One Only) to be paid by the Defendant to the plaintiff.

(d) PASS any such other orders including Costs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts of the case in the interests of justice.

3. Along with the plaint, I.A. No. l of 2013, under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 CPC, to giant an ad-interim exparte order of temporary injunction restraining the defendant, his employees, concerned, companies, agents or any person claiming through or under the defendant from printing, publishing or spreading in any manner whatsoever either in Excise Law Times or any other report or through any other reporter or any print media or otherwise, any defamatory statement or material calculated to defame the plaintiff in any manner whatsoever having been filed, the Trial Judge passed an order dated 09.01.2013. The same being material is extracted hereinbelow.

"In this case, the learned Counsel appearing for the plaintiff is filed I.A.1 U/O. 39 Rules 1 and 2 of CPC seeking TI against the defendant.

I heard the learned Counsel and perused I.A. No.1 along with accompanying affidavit and relevant documents on record. It is the contention of Counsel for the plaintiff that the defendant may again publish defamatory statement or material against the plaintiff. In view of that I deem, it is just and proper at this stage of the case to grant temporary injunction.

Hence, I proceed to pass the following:–

ORDER

Temporary Injunction is hereby granted in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant rest raining him and anybody else under him from printing, publishing or spreading any defamatory statement or material circulated (excise Law times) or any other reporter or through any print media to defame the plaintiff in any manner until next date hearing.

Plaintiff to comply relevant provisions of law if any (Order 39, Rule 3).

Issue emergent summons and notice on I.A. 1 to the defendant as per PF memo returnable by 13.03.2013."

(Underlining is by me)

4. Mr. Manmohan P.N., learned Advocate, contended that the impugned order is ex-facie arbitrary, the same having been passed in utter disregard of the mandate under Rule 3 of Order 39 CPC. He submitted that though the defendant filed statement of objections to I.A. No. 1 of 2013 and two applications (i) under Order 39, Rule 4 and (ii) under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC on 13.03.2013 and opposed the extension of the temporary injunction, the matter was adjourned to 15.04.2013 by extending the T.I, until further orders. He submitted that in view of an application filed on 16.03.2013 seeking advancement of the case to 19.03.2013, the case was advanced to 21.03.2013 and the matter was heard for sometime and was again adjourned to 22.03