The aggrieved party shall be entitled to the right of appeal against a temporary injunction order, and the court must comply with the mandatory provisions of the Civil Procedure Code.

(Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 1.8.2006 made in I.A.No.1470 of 2006 in O.S.No.414 of 2006 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Poonamallee.)

Aggrieved over the order of injunction granted by the learned District Munsif, Poonamallee made in I.A.No.1470 of 2006 in O.S.No.414 of 2006, this civil revision petition has been filed.

2. Brief facts of the case are as follows:

The respondent/plaintiff has filed O.S.No.414 of 2006 and the same is pending before the District Munsif, Poonamallee. The prayer in the suit is for bare injunction. The respondent has also filed I.A.No.1470 of 2006 for ad-interim injunction restraining the defendant/petitioner herein, his men and agent from interfering with the possession of the respondent.

3. The learned District Munsif, Poonamallee passed an order as follows:

"Heard. Perused the documents. prima facie made out. Hence injunction till 18.9.2006. Notice to the respondent including private notice also."

4. Aggrieved over the said order, this civil revision petition has been filed.

5. Mr.R.Gandhi, the learned Senior counsel appearing for the revision petitioner would contend that the learned District Munsif, Poonamallee has passed the injunction order without proper application of mind and that the order is not a speaking order. The learned counsel would further contend that in cases where exparte injunction is granted, the learned judge had to give sufficient reason as to why exparte injunction is granted.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent would contend that against an interim order passed under Order 39 Rule 1,2 and Section 94 C.P.C. the parties cannot invoke Article 227 of Constitution of India, since it is not a final order.

7. Mr.R.Gandhi, the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner would contend that when irregularities committed by the Subordinate Court, the High Court can invoke Article 227 of Constitution of India to correct the mistake committed by the Subordinate Court.

8. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner pressed into service the judgment reported in 2002 (1) CTC 458 in a case Rt Rev Dr.V.Devasahyam, Bishop in Madras CSI and another vs. D.Sahayadoss and two others, wherein it is held as follows:

"It is also relevant to note the further conclusion of Their Lordships in para 18,

"18. It is the acknowledged position of law that no party can be forced to suffer for the inaction of the court or its omissions to act according to the procedure established by law. Under the normal circumstances, the aggrieved party can prefer an appeal only against an order passed under Rules 1,2,2A,4 or 10 of Order 39 of the Code in terms of Order 43 Rule 1 of the Code. He cannot approach the appellate or revisional court during the pendency of the application for grant or vacation of temporary injunction. In such circumstances, the party who does not get justice due to the inaction of the court in following the mandate of law must have a remedy. So we are of the view that in a case where the mandate of Order 39 Rule 3A of the Code is flouted, the aggrieved party, shall be entitled to the right of appeal notwithstanding the pendency of the application for grant of vacation of a temporary injunction, against the order remaining in force. In such appeal, if preferred, the appellate court shall be obliged to entertain the appeal and further to take note of the omission of the subordinate court in complying with the provisions of Rule 3A. In appropriate cases, the appellate court, apart from granting or vacating or modifying the order of such injunction, may suggest suitable action against the erring judicial officer, including recommendation to take steps for making adverse entry in his ACRs. Failure to decide the application or vacate the exparte temporary injunction shall for the purposes of the appeal, be deemed to be the final order passed on the application for temporary inj