RAJANI DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. VASANTBA JESINHJI JADEJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) At the joint request and with the consent of the learned Advocates for the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal today.

(2.) The Appeal From Order is filed by the appellant being aggrieved of order dated 29th June, 2004 passed by the learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Rajkot below Exh.5-Application in Special Civil Suit No.67 of 2004.

(3.) Having heard the learned Advocates for the parties and perused the impugned order, it is clear that the impugned order passed below Exh.5-Application does not contain the reasons for granting ex parte injunction, required under rule-3 of Order-XXXIX of the Civil Procedure Code. Proviso to rule-3 of Order XXXIX reads: "provided that where it is proposed to grant injunction without giving notice of the application to the opposite party, the Court shall record the reasons for its opinion that the object of granting the injunction would be defeated by delay, and required the applicant ....". (emphasis supplied) In view of the decision of this Court (Coram:J.M.Panchal, J.) in Appeal From Order No.29 of 1994 dated 29th January, 1994 and in view of the decision of this Court in the matter of Nautamswamy Guru Vasudev vs. Harjibhai Nanjibhai Bhimani, reported in 2004(1) G.L.R. 827, the learned Judge was duty bound to record the reasons for granting ex parte injunction on 29th June, 2004, which continued to be operative until an order was passed by this Court in Civil Application No.5452 of 2004 on 20th July, 2004.