JAMMU & KASHMIR HIGH COURT
Muzaffar Hussain Attar, J.
Vice Chairman, S.D.A & Ors. -Appellant
Versus
New Drivers and Cleaners Union -Resopndent
CIMA No. 112/2012, IA No. 367/2012
Decided On : 28-02-2013
Fact of the Case:
The appellants challenged the order of the trial court granting an ad interim injunction application and directing them to allow the respondents to avail active parking place. The trial court also directed the police to implement the injunction order.Finding of the Court:
The trial court could not pass interim orders in a suit for mandatory injunction without affording an opportunity to file objections and without hearing the other side.Ratio Decidendi:
The trial court should have decided the application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC in the first instance to determine the maintainability of the suit. The court emphasized that the civil court has the duty to ascertain whether the suit is maintainable in law when it is filed before it. Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the impugned orders were set aside. The trial court was directed to consider and dispose of the application filed by the defendants under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC in the first instance. The court stated that if the matter survives after the disposal of the application, it can be considered on its merits for passing appropriate orders.2. In the facts and circumstances of this case, the learned Trial Judge could not pass interim orders in a suit for mandatory injunction without affording opportu#31;nity to file objections and without hearing the otherside.
3. Mr. M. Sultan, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the learned Trial Court was justified in passing the order impugned in the Appeal as the facts and circumstances of the case warranted for issuance of such directions.
4. Since the maintainability of the Suit had come under eclipse, in view of the application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, the learned Trial Court ought to have decided that application in the first instance.
5. In the present Appeal, at this stage, this Court would not consider the merits of the case to determine as to whether in the facts of the case, the learned Trial court could issue the directions and pass orders which are impugned in this Appeal.
6. Since the Court is only considering the impact of the application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC on the impugned orders, Court is refraining from considering the case on merits.
7. The moment, the application was filed under Order 7 Rule 11, it was duty of the Court to return finding on that. Even, otherwise, Civil Court is duty bound to ascertain whether the Suit is maintainable in law when same is filed before it. The Civil court cannot mechanically issue notices and orders on presentation of the Plaint. The power given under Order 7 and Rule 11 CPC can be exercised by Civil court suo-moto also.
8. For the above stated reasons, this Appeal is allowed. Impugned orders are set aside. The learned Trial court to consider and dispose of the application of the appellants/defendants filed under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC in the first instance.
9. Matter if survives after disposal of the application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC can be considered on its merits by the trial court for passing of appropriate orders in accordance with law.
10. Till the application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC is considered and disposed of, status quo as on date be maintained.
11. Disposed of alongwith connected CMP(s).
AI
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.