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

1990 Supreme(Ker) 200

BALAKRISHNAN
Sanku – Appellant
Versus
Antony – Respondent


Judgment :-

The short question that arises for consideration in this second appeal is whether a party aggrieved by the dismissal of an application under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of C.P.C. filed for taking action for disobedience or breach of injunction, can challenge the same in an appeal filed under O. XLI Rule 1 against the original decree, without recourse to a separate appeal as provided under Order XLIII Rule 1 (r) of the code.

The facts necessary for a decision on this point are as follows: Defendants in O.S.600 of 1982 on the file of the Munsiff s Court, Trichur are the appellants. The respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for injunction restraining the defendants 1 to 7 from entering into the plaint schedule property, cutting and removing trees therefrom and from making a road through any portion of the plaint property. In the suit the respondent contended that on the western side of the plaint property there is a panchayat road lying north to south and another panchayat road lying on the southern side of the property east to west. According to the respondent the appellants requested the respondent to surrender some land for widening these panchayat roads and as he refused to surrend











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