LAWS(KAR)-1995-11-76

JAYATHIRTH RAMACHARYA GUDI Vs. BINDUMADHAVACHARAYA SRINIVASACHARAYA GUDI

Decided On November 08, 1995
JAYATHIRTH RAMACHARYA GUDI Appellant
V/S
BINDUMADHAVACHARAYA SRINIVASACHARAYA GUDI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Revision under Section 115 of the C.P.C. from the Judgment and order dated 27.1.95 passed by the Civil Judge, Haveri in Misc. Appeal No. 21/94 (Jayathirth Ramacharya Gudi and Anr. v. Bindumadhavachar Srinivasachaiya Gudi and Ors.) dismissing the Appeal filed by defendants - 4 and 5 from the order of temporary injunction issued against them by the Trial Court i.e. the Munsiff, Haveri while disposing of I.A.Nos. 2 and 4 in Original Suit No. 165/92 vide its order dated 3.11.94. The lower Court affirmed the order of the Trial Court.

(2.) The facts of the case in brief are that the plaintiffs opposite party filed the suit against defendants-1 to 3 namely i.e. the present respondents-4 to 6, claiming the decree for permanent injunction restraining defendants in the suit namely 1 to 3 and their servants or agents permanently from restoring and giving or supplying any electrical energy to the suit schedule property and the welt therein in any manner whatsoever. It may be mentioned that the following expression was also used in the relief clause: "till final decision of the matter on merits i.e. O.S. 164/91 on the file of this court". This expression was later on deleted by amendment under the Trial Court's order dated 16.10.93. The second relief that has been claimed is costs and such other relief as the Court deems fit. The plaintiffs as per plaint allegations appears to have alleged the grievance and cause of action against defendant No. 1 namely, the Assistant Executive Engineer, KEB, Haveri. Along with the plaint of the suit, the plaintiffs had filed an application for temporary injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the CPC. The Trial Court while dealing with the interim relief application has observed as under:

(3.) That having felt aggrieved from the order dated 27.1.1995 passed by the lower Appellate Court dismissing the defendants Misc. Appeal, the defendants have come up in Revision under Section 115 of the CPC.