Back
2026 Supreme(Mad) 599
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. SOUNTHAR, J.
The Secretary, Vgn Sfowa Vgn Stafford - Petitioner
Versus
P. Shankar Ganeshan, S/o. S. Pandiarajan – Respondent
CRP No. 313 of 2026, CMP No1705 of 2026
Decided On : 23-01-2026
Important Points
Subject
Civil Law - Injunction
Act Referred
Headnote
(B) Civil Procedure - Procedure for challenging ad-interim injunction - Petitioner should first approach Trial Court for vacating injunction before invoking High Court's jurisdiction. (Para 3)
Facts of the case:
The Civil Revision Petition was filed concerning an ex parte ad-interim injunction granted in O.S.No.263 of 2025 to restrain the petitioner from collecting maintenance fees beyond the limit fixed by the Annual General Meeting and preserving the respondents' access to amenities.
Findings of Court:
The Court dismissed the Civil Revision Petition, emphasizing that the petitioner should first approach the Trial Court to vacate the injunction.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner could challenge the interim order without first applying to vacate it in the Trial Court.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that a party aggrieved by an ex parte injunction must follow the appropriate procedure of seeking a vacate order from the Trial Court, fostering judicial economy and procedural propriety.
Result: Civil Revision Petition dismissed.
For the Petitioner: Mr. Pradeep Jayaraman
For the Respondent: Mr.T.Velmurugan vakalath
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. parties involved in the dispute. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. dismissal of petition with liberty to seek remedy. (Para 3 , 4) |
ORDER :
S. SOUNTHAR, J.
This civil revision petition is filed challenging the docket order passed by the Trial court dated 04.09.2025, granting ad-interim injunction against the petitioner and ordering notice in the injunction application.
2. The respondents/plaintiffs filed a suit in O.S.No.263 of 2025 seeking permanent injunction restraining the petitioner/defendant from collecting maintenance fee not more the amount fixed by the Annual General Meeting held on 29.10.2023 and also restraining the petitioner/ defendant from disturbing their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the amenities like water connection, electricity supply, DG services etc. Pending suit, the respondents also filed an interlocutory application in I.A.No.4 of 2025 seeking interim injunction against the petitioners. After hearing the respondents, the Trial Court was pleased to grant exparte ad-interim injunction and ordered notice to the petitioner. The respondents were also directed to comply with Order 39 Rule 3(a) and (b) of CPC and that order is subject matter of the attack in this civil revision petition.
3. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the order granting exparte injunction, it is always open to him to enter appearance before the Trial Court and to file vacate injunction petition. Instead of following the said procedure, the petitioner is not entitled to rush to this court challenging the order passed by the Trial Court. Therefore, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Trial Court.
4. Accordingly, this civil revision petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to move the Trial Court for vacating the order of interim injunction. There shall be no order as to costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
