Back
THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK
MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI
Karmapa Charitable Trust – Appellant
Versus
State of Sikkim – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners contest prior court orders (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. supreme court's directions on repairs (Para 4) |
| 3. trial court exceeded jurisdiction (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. orders quashed; new report deadline set (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. judgment concludes and transmits information (Para 9 , 10) |
ORDER :
Meenakshi Madan Rai, J.
1. Two Orders are being assailed before this Court in the instant Petition;
(i) Order dated 20-06-2023, of the Court of the Learned District Judge, at Namchi, in Title Suit No.04 of 2022 ( Karmapa Charitable Trust and 3 Others vs. State of Sikkim and 3 Others ), which was to decide an application filed by the Petitioners on 15-03-2023 before the Learned Trial Court. Vide the Application the Petitioners sought to cross-examine the Local Commissioner, in view of his interim report dated 05-12-2022.
(ii) The second Order that is impugned before this Court is dated 20-05-2024, which was to decide an application filed by the Petitioners under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter the, “CPC”), seeking directions of the Court to restrain the Defendant No.3 from carrying out any demolition/alteration/construction in the suit property in violation of the stat
Trial Court exceeded its jurisdiction by soliciting interim reports contrary to the Supreme Court’s directive, leading to the quashing of its Orders.
A court is required to adjudicate an application concerning the alleged violation of an interim injunction on its own merits before proceeding to the final arguments of the main suit to preserve the ....
Plaint amendment under Order VI Rule 17 CPC allowable at appellate stage for subsequent events if due diligence met; premature assessment of Local Commissioner's report veracity renders rejection per....
The trial court has the jurisdiction to grant the relief of status quo ante under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of CPC and Section 151 CPC if the status quo order is violated by the respondent.
The scope of a status quo order is ambiguous and requires clear evidence for violations, as courts will not intervene without established proof of breach.
The court emphasized the necessity of enforcing interim orders and provided guidance on using police assistance for compliance in cases of ongoing violations.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
