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

2007 Supreme(All) 1096

A.N.VERMA
ROTARY INTERNATIONAL – Appellant
Versus
CIVIL JUDGE (SR. DIV. ) LUCKNOW – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Manish Mehrotra for the Appellant; Anil Kumar Tewari and Akhilesh Kumar for the Respondent.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble A.N. Varma, J.—Through the instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, a direction has been sought by the petitioners from this Court commanding the opposite party No. 1 to act within the bounds of jurisdiction vested in him and not to give any effect to the notice dated 30.3.2007, as contained in Annexure 1 to the writ petition, on the application under the provisions of Order 39, Rule 2-A of C.P.C. It has further been prayed that opposite party No. 1 be directed not to proceed any further with the said application until the Appeal pending against the original order dated 28.11.2006 is decided in accordance with the directions issued by the lower appellate, Court and to keep the proceedings of the application under Order 39, Rule 2-A, C.P.C. in abeyance till the disposal of the appeal.

2. The opposite parties No. 2 and 3 instituted a Suit for injunction, being Regular Suit No. 459 of 2000 in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Lucknow. An application under Order 39, Rule 2-A was also preferred for grant of injunction restraining the defendants from interfering in the functioning of the opposite party No. 3. The trial Court vide its order




















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