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

2023 Supreme(Mad) 346

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.
P. Sivaraj - Petitioner
Versus
M/s. Lakshmi Machine Works Ltd, Rep by its Company Secretary C.R. Shivkumaran - Respondent
C.R.P.No.3399 of 2022 and C.M.P.No.18075 of 2022
Decided On : 02-02-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. C. Jagadish.
For the Respondent: Mr. N. Sridhar.

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 227 - Grant interim injunction - Adjudication in Suit - Trial Court declined to grant interim injunction in Interlocutory Application filed along with Suit and Appellate Court granted interim injunction against which present civil revision petition is preferred – Held, Injunction was granted by Appellate Court, which is in force for past about seven months and under these circumstances, this Court is not inclined to interfere with order leaving open merits raised between parties for adjudication in Suit - Trial Court is directed to proceed with trial and dispose of Suit as expeditiously as possible and parties are directed to cooperate for earlier disposal of both Suits - Petition disposed of.

ORDER :

[Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the order and decreetal order passed in C.M.A.No.4 of 2019 dated 25.07.2022 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Udumalpet, reversing the order and decreetal order dated 15.04.2019 passed in I.A.No.1418 of 2017 in O.S.No.320 of 2017 on the file of District Munsif Court, Udumalpet.]

1. The civil revision petition filed against the fair and decreetal order passed in C.M.A.No.4 of 2019 dated 25.07.2022 reversing the order and decreetal order dated 15.04.2019 passed in I.A.No.1418 of 2017 in O.S.No.320 of 2017.

2. The revision petitioner is the defendant in O.S.No.320 of 2017, which was instituted by the respondents for permanent injunction. The Trial Court declined to grant interim injunction in the Interlocutory Application filed along with the Suit. The respondent herein preferred C.M.A.No.4 of 2019 against the order of dismissal passed by the Trial Court and the Appellate Court granted interim injunction against which the present civil revision petition is preferred.

3. The revision petitioner also filed another Suit in O.S.No.312 of 2017 for the relief of permanent injunction, which is also pending. Both the Suits are ripe for trial and the learned counsel for the respondent brought to the notice of this Court that the trial had commenced and listed for hearing on 14.02.2023. Thus, it is for the parties to proceed with the trial and establish their respective cases on merits and in accordance with law. The injunction was granted by the Appellate Court on 25.07.2022, which is in force for the past about seven months and under these circumstances, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order leaving open the merits raised between the parties for adjudication in the Suit.

4. In view of the facts and circumstances, the Trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial and dispose of the Suit as expeditiously as possible and the parties are directed to cooperate for earlier disposal of the both the Suits.

5. With the abovesaid directions, the Civil Revision Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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 Back to top