ATUL JAIN Vs. ANIRUDH SINGH KATOCH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANT /petitioner, herein, has preferred present petition assailing the orders dated 3.5.2012 passed by the 2nd Additional District Judge, Nainital in Civil Revision No. 58 of 2010 as well as the order dated 6.10.2010 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Nainital.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the present case, inter alia, are that plaintiff/respondent, herein, preferred O.S. No. 30 of 2000 in the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Nainital. Suit is filed by the Manu Maharani Enterprizes through Sri Anirudh Singh Katoch claiming himself as Managing Director and one of the shareholders of the plaintiff company seeking permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendant/petitioner, herein, restraining the defendant/petitioner, herein, in making any interference in the working of the plaintiff/respondent, herein, on the travel desk situated in the lobby of Hotel Manu Maharani, Nainital.

(3.) LEARNED Trial Court, vide order dated 24.5.2000, was pleased to direct the parties to maintain status quo. Thereafter, Misc. Case No. 41 of 2001 was filed by the plaintiff/respondent, herein, in the court of Civil Judge, Nainital under Order 39 Rule 2 -A of CPC saying that defendant/petitioner, herein, had disconnected the connection of telephone no. 39453, which was working on the travel desk, in violation of the status quo order dated 24.5.2000. In the application under Order 39 Rule 2 -A of CPC, an application was moved by the plaintiff/respondent, herein under Order 26 Rule 9 of CPC requesting the court to appoint advocate commissioner to visit and inspect the spot.