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

2010 Supreme(P&H) 320

L.N.MITTAL
Sumer Chand – Appellant
Versus
Santosh Kumari – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Mr. RM Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. RS Mamli, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral).:- Defendants have approached this Court by way of instant revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning order dated 29.9.2007 (Annexure P/1) and order dated 12.11.2008 (Annexure P/2) passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jagadhri.

2. Respondents filed suit for permanent injunction against the petitioners. Vide order dated 29.9.2007, Annexure P/1, learned trial court allowed application of plaintiffs for temporary injunction and thereby restrained the defendants from interfering in the possession of the plaintiffs over the suit property except in due course of law. Thereafter plaintiffs moved application for providing police help for implementation of order dated 29.9.2007, Annexure P/1. The said application has been allowed by the trial court vide order dated 12.11.2008, Annexure P/2 granting police help for implementation of order Annexure P/1.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners fairly concedes that order Annexure P/1 whereby temporary injunction was granted to the plaintiffs cannot be challenged in the instant revision petition be








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