GOKUL CHAND MITAL
Bhinya Ram son of Shera Ram – Appellant
Versus
Hukma Ram and two Others – Respondent
(2). In the application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C., the plaintiff got mandatory injunction to remove the obstruction in the street so that the plaintiff can pass easily through that passage and prohibitory injunction not to obstruct the street in future. The trial court did not say that by that order it was giving temporary relief to the plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 and or under Section 151,C.P.C. only. Against that order of the trial court, the defendant filed an appeal before the District Court and the District Court relying on a judgment of this Court in Minerva Siksha Samiti, Bharatpur v. Smt. Mithlesh Kumari (1), held that mandatory injunction can only be granted under Section 151, C.P.C. and, since in the case in hand mandatory injunction was granted, appeal will not lie under Order XXXIII Rule i(r), C.P.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.