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

2022 Supreme(MP) 139

VISHAL DHAGAT
Trivikram Prasad – Appellant
Versus
Yashodanandan Dwivedi – Respondent


Advocates:
Vibhudhendra Mishra for petitioner; Sharad Gupta for respondents.

ORDER

1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging order dated 10.11.2021 contained in Annexure-P/1.

2. By impugned order dated 10.11.2021 contained in Annexure-P/1, appellate Court has stayed order of injunction.

3. Counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that order of appellate Court suffers from illegality and is without jurisdiction. It is submitted that appellate Court cannot pass order of stay over grant of injunction. Counsel appearing for petitioner relied on judgment reported in (1997) 5 ALT 776, in case of Pothuru Venkata Rama Raju v. Yandra Venkata Narsayya and others. He relied on para 9 of the said judgment which is quoted as under:-

“9. It has to be borne in mind that there is any amount of difference between a decree for recovery of money or a decree for possession on one hand and a decree for perpetual injunction on the other. In the former cases, the decrees are executable and whenever an appeal is filed, interim stay is granted with a view to maintain the status quo between the parties. Order 41 rule 5 C.P.C. empowers an appellate Court to pass such an order in respect of such decrees. Whereas in the latt

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