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

2016 Supreme(Gau) 172

N.CHAUDHURY
Vinit Tibrewala – Appellant
Versus
Bidya Kanta Upadhyaya – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. P. Mahanta
For the Respondents: Mr. P. Sundi

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. P. Mahanta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Sundi, learned counsel for the opposite parties.

2. In this application under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the order passed by the learned Civil Judge, Sonitpur in Misc. Appeal No. 1 of 2010 under Order XXXIX Rule 2-A of the Code of Civil Procedure has been called in question.

3. The present petitioner as plaintiff instituted Title Suit No. 46 of 2006 in the court of learned Munsiff No.1 at Tezpur praying for his declaration of right, title and confirmation of possession along with other prayers. In the said suit he also filed an application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying for injunction and the learned trial court passed an order on 25.9.2006 directing the parties to maintain status-quo with respect to the suit property. It is the case of the opposite parties here that prior to institution of the suit there was a proceeding under Section 145 Cr.P.C. before Executive Magistrate at Tezpur wherein an order of attachment has been passed. The said order of attachment was subsequently vacated. The opposite parties thereafter preferred a revision petition be











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