SAKAMMA Vs. EREGOWDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Ex.SA. is by the original defendant 3 against the decree parsed by the Civil Judge, at, Hassan in RA.84 of 1972 confirming the order passed on IA.6 in OS.202 of 1966 by the Munsiff, Channarayantna.

(2.) Respondent-plaintiff instituted OS.202 of 1966 for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with his possession and enjoyment of the suit property. During the pendency of the suit, he obtained an interim order of injunction. That suit came to be dismissed. RA.149 of 1967 filed against the said decree was also dismissed. RSA.898 of 1968 filed against the said decree was also dismissed by this Court on 5-7-1971. During the pendency of this litigation, the plaintiff had the benefit of the interim order of injunction.

(3.) The appellant filed an application under S.144 CPC for restitution on the ground that on the strength of the interim order passed in the, suit, she was dispossessed and, therefore, she is entitled to restitution. The application was resisted on the ground that the remedy of the appellant was not by way of an application under S.144 CPC but by means of a regular suit. This objection was sustained and the application of the appellant was dismissed. The order has been affirmed by the learned Civil Judge. Hence, this execution second appeal.