A S ANSAR Vs. A K ABDUL KAREEM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first respondent in this Civil Revision Petition filed O.S No.748 of 2018 on the file of the III Additional District Munsif Court, Tiruchirappalli seeking the relief of declaration and permanent injunction. The subject matter of the suit pertained to the affairs of a registered society by name Majilis-Ul-Ulama. The said society is running schools, a Kalyana Mandapam and an Orphanage. There are two groups vying for the control and the management of the society. One is led by Shri.A.Niyaz Ahamad and the other by Shri.A.S.Ansar. It appears that both conducted rival elections for the Triennium 2015-2018 and declared themselves elected as General Secretary. Suits were instituted on either side for finality is yet to be arrived at as regards who is in possession and management. Now, the issue is with regard to holding of the elections for the triennium 2018- 2021. The grievance of the first respondent is that while the group led by Shri.A.S.Ansar issued a notification dated 28.07.2018 proposing to hold the election on 19.08.2018, the other group has also issued a rival election notification dated 03.08.2018 proposing to hold the election on 26.08.2018. The first respondent herein seeks nullification of both the election notifications. The court below had granted an exparte interim order of status quo on 10.08.2018 in I.A.No.742 of 2018 in O.S No.748 of 2018. The said order reads as under :

(2.) Questioning the validity of the said order dated 10.08.2018, this Civil Revision Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the revision petitioner contended that a mere reading of the impugned order would on the very face of it show that the procedure laid down in Order 39 Rule 1 to 3 of Civil Procedure Code has not been complied with. It is virtually non speaking. The reason that has been set out is no reason at all. An interim order of injunction can be granted only after the Court has satisfied itself as regards the prima facie case, irreparable injury and balance of convenience. There is nothing on record to show that the court below had satisfied itself on these three counts.

(3.) He also alleged that in this case, there has been forum shopping. OS No.600 of 2018 had already been filed before the First Additional Sub Court, Tiruchirappalli in a representative capacity and in the said case, both the present defendants have been shown as D1 and D2. This was followed by the institution of OS No.629 of 2018 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Tiruchirappalli. Thereafter, one more suit in OS No.721 of 2018 was filed before the Principal District Munsif Court, Tiruchirappalli in which the election notification dated 28.07.2018 has been challenged. The first respondent who is the present plaintiff was shown as the 5th defendant in the said suit.