ANAND KUMAR MISHRA Vs. VIKRAM PANDEY @ VIKRAM MISHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri D.S.P. Singh learned counsel for the petitioner who claims to be defendant in Suit no. 1122 of 2012 (Vikram Pandey Vs Anand Kumar Mishra) pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Varanasi and Sri Shailendra for the respondent plaintiff.

(2.) According to Sri D.S.P. Singh learned counsel for the petitioner the suit filed by the plaintiff respondent was for declaration and permanent injunction with respect to the property in question. He submits that the defendant petitioner was noticed and he has filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 (b) CPC objecting to very jurisdiction of the court including on the question of valuation of the suit. Learned counsel states that such application requires to be heard first as a preliminary issue since it goes to the root of jurisdiction of the court below and any application made by the plaintiff respondent for grant of temporary injunction may be considered thereafter. According to him by the impugned order dated 09.10.2013 the court below has directed the defendant petitioner to make his submission on the temporary injunction application whereupon the defendant petitioner was compelled to file an application for grant of time to approach the High Court against such impugned order dated 09.10.2013. He states that the Trial Court has granted time and hence this writ petition.

(3.) From the submission of learned counsel for the defendant petitioner and from the averments made in this writ petition it appears that the plaintiff respondent had filed the suit and along with the suit he filed an application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC. Thereafter the plaintiff-respondent appears to have approached the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India being No. 1428 of 2013 (Vikram Pandey Vs Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) and 10 others) wherein by the order dated 17.05.2013 this court directed the court below to decide the interim injunction application of the plaintiff after considering the objection of the defendants in accordance with law without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties and in case there is no other legal impediment in the same.