SYED ABDUL RAZACK Vs. MATADIN AGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) This appeal is directed against the order of a division bench of the high court of A. P. passed in LPA No. 193 of 1993 upsetting the orders of a learned Single Judge, passed in breach of injunction proceedings.

(3.) The appellant herein was injuncted by the court for alienating certain properties. According to the appellant before he was served with the injunction he. had disposed of those properties. The price fetched was Rs. 75,000. 00. The breach of the injunction was reported to the High court. Thelearned Single Judge took the view that the appellant had evaded service of the injunction and had indulged in a hide and seek game and, therefore, deserved to be dealt with severely. The appellant was thus ordered to be detained in civil prison for three months. The appellant then showed cause to the learned Single Judge against the action ordered. He pleaded that he was not aware of the issuance of injunction and that the 'refusal' recorded by the postman on the registered covered letter sent to him was wrong. The learned single Judge impressed by the version of the appellant recalled the order of detention and ordered instead attachment of the sum of Rs. 75,000. 00, the price which the sold property had fetched, lying with the Vijaya Bank, secunderabad. Reflected inherently in the said order was recall of the order of detention since the court effected the said attachment and directed the release of the appellant. This view of the learned Single Judge was upset by the division bench of the High court in Letters Patent Appeal taking the view that it was not open to the learned Single Judge under the guise of a review to modify the sentence and order the appellant's release by exonerating him from his liability for flouting the injunction.