TILAK RAJ Vs. SURESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF /respondent no. 1, herein, preferred OS No. 141 of 2014, Suresh Kumar v. Rewati Lal and others, seeking permanent prohibitory injunction along with ad interim injunction application. Suit was taken up by the learned Trial Court on 3.7.2014. Learned Trial Court was pleased to issue summons to the defendants fixing 2.8.2014 for filing the written statement and 8.8.2014 for framing of issues. Learned Trial Court was further pleased to issue notices on an application moved under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC seeking ad interim injunction for 10.7.2014. A Civil Court Amin was directed by the learned Trial Court to serve the defendants and to inspect the spot and submit the report of the spot.

(2.) UNDISPUTEDLY , defendants were served by the Civil Court Amin and at the time of inspecting the spot, the Civil Court Amin found that defendants were raising construction on the spot. Despite valid service on the defendants, the defendants opted not to file any reply to the application seeking ad interim injunction on or before the date fixed i.e. 10.7.2014. The plaintiff moved an application on 18.7.2014 stating therein that since the defendants have already been served and they did not file any reply to the ad interim injunction application and were continuing to raise construction, therefore, defendants be restrained to raise constructions on the spot otherwise the purpose of filing the suit would be frustrated.

(3.) LEARNED Trial Court, vide order dated 18.7.2014, was pleased to reject the application so moved by the plaintiff fixing 2.8.2014 for disposal of the ad interim injunction application.