BABU T.S. Vs. DHARMA PARIPALANA YOGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondents in I.A. No. 2092 of 2012 in O.S. No. 71 of 2012 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Kochi challenges the order by which the lower Court directed to proceed with the application filed by the petitioner to prosecute the respondents under Order 39 Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure. The suit was for a perpetual injunction. On the application filed by the plaintiff the Court passed an interim injunction order prohibiting the defendants from taking out a parallel religious procession in connection with the festival of a temple. Later, when the case was taken up for consideration the plaintiff submitted that the suit was not pressed. Acting upon it the Court dismissed the suit. On the same day the plaintiff had filed I.A. No. 559 of 2012 to prosecute the defendants under Order 39 Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure on the allegation that they had violated the injunction order. This I.A. had not come up before the Court when the suit was dismissed. After the disposal of the suit as mentioned above, the Court passed an order directing prosecution of the defendants. The correctness of this order is assailed in this Civil Revision Petition.

(2.) HEARD the learned counsel on both sides.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on State of Bihar v. Rani Sonabati Kumari, 1961 KHC 492 : AIR 1961 SC 221 : 1961 (1) SCR 728 : 1961 BLJR 285 : 1961 Pat L.R. (SC) 26 : 1960 (2) Ker. L.R. 681 also in support of his argument that the petition under Order 39 Rule 2A is not maintainable. On the other hand the learned counsel for the defendants relies on T.M. Bagasarwalla v. H.R. Industries, 1997 KHC 506 : AIR 1997 SC 1240 : 1997 (2) KLT SN 14 : 1997 (3) SCC 443 : 1997 (2) Mah. L.J. 1. The main question that arose for consideration in Rani Sonabati Kumari's case, which was considered before the amendment of Code of Civil Procedure in 1976, is whether the State can be prosecuted for violation of an order of injunction. It is a decision rendered by a five Judge Bench of the Supreme Court.