S THIRUNAVUKKARASU Vs. J JAYALALITHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant in C.S.No.322 of 1997 has filed O.S.A.No.179 of 1997 aggrieved by the order dated 17.6.1997 made by the learned single Judge in Application No.356 of 1997 in the said suit C.S.No. 322of 1997, under which an order of injunction was granted in favour of the plaintiff. Appeals, O.S.A.Nos.180 to 183, 185 and 186of 1997 are filed by the applicants who prayed to add them as additional defendants in the said suit C.S.No.322 of 1997 aggrieved by the order rejecting their applications by the learned single Judge by the very common order dated 17.6.1997.

(2.) O .S.A.No.184 of 1997 is filed by the Applicants in O.A.No.1917 of 1997. They had filed the said application to direct the Registry to place all the papers before the Honourable Chief Justice for passing appropriate orders during the course of hearing of the case by the learned single judge. It is stated in ground No.l of the appeal memorandum that no order was passed and that Application No.1917 of 1997 had become infructuous. But as a matter of fact the said Application No. 1917 of 1997 was dismissed by the learned single Judge as not pressed as recorded in paragraph 14 of the order under appeal. In view of the order passed by the learned single Judge in O.A.No.356 of 1997 in C.S.No.322 of 1997 and other applications filed seeking to implead as additional defendants in the said suit, nothing more is required to be done in this appeal, for the reasons more than one, viz., firstly that application No.1917 of 1997 was dismissed on 17.6.1997 as not pressed secondly the application No.1917 of 1997 even otherwise had become infructuous in view of the order passed by the learned single Judge in O.A.No.356 of 1997 and lastly when the very order passed by the learned single judge in O.A.No.356 of 1997 is under challenge in O.S.A.No.179 of 1997, this O.S.A.No.184 of 1997 is of no consequence. Hence this O.S.A.No.184 of 1997 is dismissed.

(3.) SINCE the learned single Judge, in his order under appeals, has set out the facts leading to the passing of the impugned order in sufficient details and particulars succinctly, we do not think it necessary or desirable to state them again in detail. However, we shall state them briefly, to the extent they are needed, for the purpose of disposal of these appeals.