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

2023 Supreme(J&K) 719

RAHUL BHARTI
Pankaj Chandan – Appellant
Versus
Ashok Singh Chib – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Rahul Pant; Amit Bhardwaj
For the Respondent: Vikas Magotra; Nitin Bhasin; Ankesh Chandel

JUDGEMENT

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and scanned the record.

2. Through this petition an exercise of supervisory jurisdiction of this Court vesting in terms of article 227 of the Constitution of India is being solicited by the petitioner for examining the legal fitness of exercise of jurisdiction on the part of the court of learned Ist Additional District Judge, Jammu in adjudicating a civil miscellaneous appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(r) of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 against an order of rejection of temporary injunction application maintained under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 in a civil suit of the respondent No. 1-Ashok Singh Chib before the court of learned Sub-Registrar (Munsiff), Jammu. The two courts are tangent in terms of their respective adjudication with respect to an interlocutory injunctory matter.

3. Examination of facts in/of a case, be it civil or criminal, before a court of law, be it at trial or first appellate stage, is meant and expected to be both at macro as well as micro level on the part of a given court. For this, a perpetual principle to be referred to and reminded is “fact firs

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