THIMMAYYA Vs. M BSADASIVAPPA AND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against an order by which a previous order of temporary injunction was vacated. Both orders were passed in the course of proceedings relating to the application of the appellant for permission to sue in forma pauperis. There is no order as yet for the case being registered as a suit.

(2.) Two questions arise for consideration viz., whether at this stage an order of temporary injunction can be made at all and if so, the provision under which it can be passed. The power to grant temporary injunction is conferred by Section 94, C.P.C., which states:

(3.) In 'DHANESHWAR NATH v. GHANASHYM DHAR', AIR 1910 All 183, relied upon by appellant is dissented from in 'HEMENDRALAL v. INDO SWISS TRADING CO. LTD.', AIR 1945 Pat 483 where it is clearly stated: "It is not open to a Court to grant injunction in exercise of its inherent power under Section 151." In view of this and the observation in '11 Mys C C R 90, with which we agree, the application is not maintainable. Even otherwise, the appeal is not competent as an appeal does not He against an order passed in the exercise of inherent powers. The order is one passed in the exercise of discretion. In our opinion this is not a fit case in which the appeal need be treated as a revision petition and the correct ness of the order of the lower Court examined. The appeal is dismissed. Parties will bear their own costs.