KANTAPPA Vs. KRISHNABAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil revision petition is preferred by the petitioner who was the plaintiff in the trial court against the order dated 26-8-1987 passed by the Additional Civil Judge, Bidar, in M.A. No. 37 of 1985 allowing the miscellaneous appeal and setting aside the order dated 8-8-1985 passed by the Munsiff, Basavakalyan, in O.S. No. 79 of 1984 dismissing I.A. No. II filed by the respondent under O. 39, R. 4 of the C.P.C.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent and perused the records of the case.

(3.) The petitioner has filed a suit against the respondent for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 15-5-1984. He also filed an I.A. under O. 39, Rr. 1 and 2, C.P.C. for temporary injunction and a temporary injunction came to be issued on 2-6-1984 ex parte. After the defendants appeared in the suit and filed a written statement on 18-9-1984 they filed 1. A. No. II for vacating the temporary injunction under O. 39, R. 4, C.P.C. The trial Court after hearing both sides and perusing the material on record dismissed I.A. No. 11 filed by the respondents and made the temporary injunction issued on 2-6-1984 absolute. The respondents were aggrieved by this order and they have challenged the said order in appeal in the Court of the Civil Judge, Bidar, and that appeal came to be heard by the Additional Civil Judge, Bidar, and he allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the Munsiff, Basavakalyan, and allowed I.A. No. 11 filed by the respondents and dismissed IA. No. I. It is this order that is challenged in this case.