K KARALA GOUNDER Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision has been filed under Article 227 of the constitution of India, since the lower Court has not taken up the I. A. No. 203 of 1996 for disposal, especially, then an ex parte order of injunction has been granted. THE petitioner, who is the respondent in the I. A. has filed counter and also filed a petition for vacating the injunction. THE lower court, without taking up the matter, had adjourned the same from 28. 6. 1996 to 24. 7. 1996. Now, the counsel for the petitioner represents that on 24. 7. 1996 the ex parte order of injunction has been extended and the I. A. has been posted to 17. 9. 1996. It has been repeatedly held by this Court that whenever ex parte order of injunction has been granted, the lower court should earnestly try to dispose of the application within thirty days as per Order 39, Rule 3 (A) of C. P. C. THE adjournment of more than thirty days will amount to avoidance of the mandatory provisions of the Civil Procedure Code. Even in case of adjournment the Court below has to give the reason and without assigning any reason the Court is not entitled to adjourn the matter.

(2.) HOWEVER, on this ground, if the civil revision petition is admitted and stay is granted, the right of the other side will be affected. Because of the mistake of the Court, the party should not suffer. Hence I am of the view that it would be suffice to direct the lower Court to dispose of the Interlocutory Application within one month. Accordingly, the lower court is directed to dispose of I. A. No. 203 of 1996 within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order in this civil revision petition and report the same to this Court. The civil revision petition is ordered accordingly.