VIDYADHAR GOVIND PATWARDHAN Vs. ARAVIND SHREEDHAR GHATPANDE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in the two matters is the landlord who had secured a decree for ejectment against one Sahashrabuddhe. The said decree was assailed in appeal and writ petition not by Sahashrabuddhe, but by the person figuring as 1st respondent in the present proceedings.

(2.) IN the writ petition bearing No. 824 of 1988 I had passed an order on 23 February, 1988 which reads thus :---

(3.) THIS time, the 1st respondent filled a suit claiming a declaration of his being a tenant of the petitioner---the contract of tenancy having been arrived at on or about 17 March, 1988. Unfortunately, the two Court below were lured into granting an interim injunction pending the disposal of the suit, the effect being that the 1st respondent should not be evicted. In other words, the time and expense incurred by the petitioner in facing Writ Petition No. 824 of 1988 and the 2nd Appeal No. 173 of 1988 not to speak of the proceeding the same, had all gone waste. The revision is directed against the order granting interim injunction and Contempt Petition No. 153 of 1988 is to record a finding of respondent 1 having committed contempt and take appropriate action against him.