Back
2025 Supreme(RAJ) 1125
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA, J
SUSHILA BAI W/O RAMNARAYAN D/O LAKSHMI CHAND – Appellant
Versus
BRIJMOHAN – Respondent
CW / 3387 / 2022
Important Points
Subject
Civil Law - Civil Procedure
Act Referred
Headnote
(B) Appellate Jurisdiction - The appellate court correctly noted that an interim order merges into the final order of dismissal, rendering it ineffective. (Paras 4-5)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction, leading to interim orders that were violated by the respondents. The trial court ordered civil imprisonment, which was later set aside by the appellate court.
Findings of Court:
The appellate court's decision to set aside the trial court's order was upheld as the original suit dismissal nullified the interim orders.
Issues: Whether the appellate court erred in setting aside the trial court's order of civil imprisonment based on the dismissal of the original suit.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the dismissal of the original suit nullified the interim orders, and thus, the appellate court acted correctly in allowing the appeal.
Result: Petition dismissed.
Mr. Ashok Kumar Pareek, Adv.
Order :
1. This Civil Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioners against the order dated 02.11.2021 passed by Additional District Judge No.1, Bundi in Civil Misc. Appeal No.153/2014, whereby the appeal filed by the respondent Nos.1 to 7 has been allowed and the order dated 18.12.2012 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Indergarh, District Bundi in Civil Case No.19/2007 has been set aside.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that plaintiffs Laxmichand & Ors filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the defendants in which interim order was passed in favour of the petitioners vide order dated 31.03.2006 and 08.10.2007. Respondents had violated the said order. So, petitioners filed an application under Order 39 Rule 2A CPC . The trial court vide order dated 18.12.2012 allowed the application filed by the petitioners and directed one month's civil imprisonment to each of the respondent Nos.1 to 7. They had challenged the order by way of miscellaneous civil appeal. The appellate court vide order dated 02.11.2021 allowed the appeal filed by the respondents and set aside the order dated 18.12.2012 passed by the trial court.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that respondents had violated the orders dated 31.03.2006 and 08.10.2007 passed by the trial court but appellate court had committed an error in setting aside the order dated 18.12.2012 passed by the trial court. So, judgment dated 02.11.2021 passed by the appellate court be set aside.
4. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the impugned judgment.
5. Appellate court while allowing the appeal filed by the respondents clearly mentioned that original suit filed by the plaintiffs was dismissed vide order dated 11.10.2013. So, interim order passed in their favour was merged in the final order. On account of dismissal of the original suit, interim order passed by the court below was nullified. So, in my considered opinion, appellate court had not committed any error in allowing the appeal filed by the respondents. So, present petition filed by the petitioners being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly.
