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

1984 Supreme(Guj) 57

R.A.MEHTA
N. V. ASHAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: DIPAK K.TRIVEDI, M.D.RANA

R. A. MEHTA, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner (original plaintiff) sought an interim junction against his transfer from Junagadh to Bharuch. He is junior Employment Officer a Class 111 employee in the employment of State Government- The learned Trial Judge rejected the application. He carried the matter in appeal- There the learned District Judge held that the appeal and the suit were not maintainable on the ground that the plaintiff had not fulfilled the conditions under sec 80 C. P. C. for filing a suit without statutory notice.

( 2 ) IT must be noted that alongwith the plaint the petitioner- plaintiff had given an application Ex. 2 to the trial Court and obtained permission for instituting the suit without notice. That had become necessary because there was urgent and immediate need to obtain interim relief against the order of transfer. Thus the suit was competently instituted under sec. 80 (2 ). However the learned District Judge came to the conclusion that when the trial Court refused interim relief it meant that there was no urgency and no need for immediate relief and therefore a suit was held not maintainable. This reasoning by the learned District Judge is clearly erroneous The onl










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