Item No. 5

(Through Video Conferencing)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR

AT IMPHAL

MC(CRP(CRP.Art.227)) No. 12 of 2021

Lairikyengbam (N) Tourangbam (O) Babikarani @ Veda Devi & anr.

….Applicants

- Versus -

Longjam Ibohal Singh & anr.

…Respondents

BEFORE

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJAY KUMAR

19.11.2021

The applicants in this miscellaneous case are the respondents in the

main civil revision petition. They seek an interim temporary injunction

restraining the petitioners in the revision petition from entering into the suit land

and making constructions thereon, pending disposal of the revision petition.

Though Order XXXIX Rules 1, 2 & 3 CPC do not bar the defendant(s)

in a suit from seeking a temporary injunction against the plaintiff(s) in deserving

situations, the case on hand is not that simple.

The main revision petition arises out of OS No. 24 of 2006/51 of 2011.

This suit was dismissed for default on 30.06.2010. It was restored on

03.03.2011 but came to be dismissed for default once again on 08.11.2011. This

cycle recurred again as the suit was restored once more on 31.12.2011 but was,

yet again, dismissed for default on 27.04.2012. The application filed by the

plaintiffs in the suit for restoration was dismissed by the Trial Court on

17.01.2013, not on merits but for default. The plaintiffs thereupon filed an

application seeking restoration of the application filed for restoration, which had

been dismissed for default. On 13.06.2014, the Trial Court refused to condone

LAIREN

MAYUM

INDRAJE

ET

SINGH

Digitally signed

by

LAIRENMAYUM

INDRAJEET

SINGH

Date:

2021.11.19

14:42:31

+05'30'

2

the delay in filing the application. It is against this order that the present revision

was preferred by the plaintiffs in the suit.

The aforestated facts clearly demonstrate that there is no proceeding

pending before the Trial Court as on date.

Interestingly, the main revision petition, viz., CRP No. 48 of 2015,

was dismissed by this Court for non-prosecution on 25.09.2018. Applications are

still pending for restoration and for condonation of the delay in seeking such

restoration. In effect, there is no revision pending before this Court as on date.

In the aforesaid circumstances, when neither a suit is pending before

the Trial Court nor a civil revision petition is pending before this Court, it is not

open to the defendants in the suit, the respondents in the civil revision petition,

to maintain an application for a temporary injunction. Any actions on the part of

the plaintiffs in the suit causing grievance to the defendants therein would

constitute a separate cause of action and it would be for them to invoke

appropriate legal remedies in accordance with law. Filing an injunction

application in a defunct CRP is not the remedy.

MC(CRP(CRP.Art.2270) No. 12 of 2021 is accordingly dismissed,

leaving it open to the applicants to take recourse to proper remedies available

to them before the appropriate forum in accordance with law.

A copy of this order shall be supplied online or through whatsapp to

the learned counsel for the parties.

CHIEF JUSTICE

Indrajeet