CHATHAN MADHAVI Vs. DARSANA VASTHRALAYAM AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a review petition seeking to have the order dated 21.01.2015 in O.P.(C) No. 2746/2014 reviewed on the ground that real issue involved in the case had not been considered by this Court and that certain facts referred to before this Court are not correct and true.

(2.) THE grievance voiced by the petitioner in the original petition was that she was sought to be ousted from the business though she was a partner and that is not permissible. The trial court found that the licence for Stall No. 5 of Municipality stood in the name of the review petitioner before this Court and also that attempt of the plaintiff before the trial court was to oust one of the partners from the business which is not permissible in law and therefore the trial court declined to grant the relief sought for by the petitioner. Applications filed by both the plaintiff and defendants for interim reliefs were dismissed. Both carried the matter in appeal as C.M.A. Nos. 5 and 6 of 2014 before the lower appellate court. The lower appellate court while allowing C.M.A No. 5/2014 ordered as follows:

(3.) THE respondents before this Court, on the other hand, contended that the lower appellate court had correctly appreciated the facts and by way of interim measure made certain arrangements to see that the business is carried on. Learned counsel went on to point out that no grounds are made out interfere with the order of the court below.