N G VASU Vs. K G RAJASHEKARAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) in this case, an ex parte order of injunction had been granted on 9-3-1995. After passing the ex parte injunction Order, court directed notice be issued of la. I and temporary injunction. Thereafter, it appears from the certified order-sheet that on 6-4-1995, a written statement of objections was filed.

(2.) the case thereafter was fixed for 29-7-1995. Thereafter, an application under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, for short, 'code' for a direction to the police of nelamangala, to compel the defendants not to commit the breach of the injunction Order, by order dated 28-9-1995. On 28-9-1995, the trial court ordered as under:

(3.) the learned counsel for the revisionists submitted that no sufficient opportunity was given to the defendants to file objections to the application. Therefore, the order is illegal. Further, the learned counsel for the revisionists pointed out that this order has already been implemented by the police and his cottage industrial shop has been locked. As such, the learned counsel submits that if there is a breach of injunction Order, specific remedy under order 39, Rule 2-a, is provided and that orders can be passed only after notice to the parties, so, course under Section 151 of the code was not open to the court below.