Back
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Raina, J
Phodal – Appellant
Versus
Khema – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court addressed the legality of a magistrate's powers related to obstruction removal. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. discussion of differing views on magistrate's authority in india regarding mandatory injunctions. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. need for effective orders by magistrates to prevent exploitation of rights. (Para 6 , 7 , 9 , 11) |
| 4. emphasis on clarity of jurisdiction and statutory interpretation minimizing ambiguity. (Para 8 , 10 , 12) |
| 5. court favored empowering magistrates to issue positive orders where necessary. (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
1. This case has been referred by Raina J. under sub-rule (2) of R.9 of Chapter I of the High Court Rules, for decision of the following questions:
(i) Whether under S.147(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure the Magistrate is competent to issue a mandatory injunction for the removal of the existing obstruction which is necessary for maintaining status quo and prohibiting the other party from interfering with the right of the aggrieved party, until the matter is decided by a competent Civil Court.
(ii) Whether the view expressed by the Nagpur High Court in King Emperor v. Abdullah , ILR (1949) Nag 388 : (AIR 1949 Nag 275) which was followed by this Co
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
