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

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
ARPIT THAPA (MINOR) – Appellant
Versus
ISHAN THAPA – Respondent
WPMS 2444/2022



Advocates:
['NALIN SAUN', '', 'SUMIT BAJAJ', 'SAURABH KUMAR PANDEY', 'SHAILENDRA NAURIYAL', '', 'PREETI BAHUGUNA']

SL.

No

Date

Office Notes,

reports, orders or

proceedings or

directions and

Registrar’s order

with Signatures

COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS

WPMS No. 2444 of 2022

Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Mr.

Saurabh

Kumar

Pandey,

Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Shailendra Nauriyal, Advocate

for the caveator.

Petitioner filed an injunction suit,

which was registered as O.S. No. 208 of

2020. Defendant No. 1 in the said suit

(respondent no. 1 herein) filed cross

objection in the suit. Both petitioner and

respondent

no.

1

filed

applications

seeking

temporary

injunction

and

learned

Trial

Court

allowed

the

application filed by plaintiff and rejected

the

injunction

application

filed

by

defendant no. 1, vide order dated

21.05.2022.

However,

the

appeal

filed

by

defendant no. 1 against said order was

allowed and the order of temporary

injunction passed in favour of the plantiff

was set-aside by the IV Additional

District Judge, Dehradun. Thus, feeling

aggrieved by the

judgment of the

appellate

court

dated

10.08.2022,

petitioner has approached this Court.

Heard

learned

counsel

for

the

parties and perused the record.

Learned Appellate Court has given

valid

reasons

for

reversing

finding

recorded by the Trial Court on prima

facie case, balance of convenience and

irreparable injury. Thus, this Court does

not find any reason to interfere with the

order passed by learned Appellate Court.

It is well-settled that grant of

temporary injunction is discretionary,

which is granted subject to fulfilment of

certain parameters. It is equally well-

settled that this Court while exercising

power of superintendence under Article

227 do not normally interfere with the

discretionary order passed by learned

courts below.

Having regard to the facts and

circumstances of the case, the writ

petition is dismissed. However, learned

Trial

Court

is

requested

to

make

endeavour to decide the case, as early

as possible.

(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)

23.11.2022

Ujjwal

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 Back to top