HARISHCHANDRA NARAYAN MAURYA Vs. RAJENDRAPRASAD DARGAHI VARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ORIGINAL plaintiff Harishchandra Narayan Maurya is the appellant in this appeal and is aggrieved by the order dated 19-10-1993 passed by the City Civil Court, Bombay dismissing two notices of Motion viz. Notice of Motion No. 3388 of 1992 and Notice of Motion No. 3986 of 1992.

(2.) THE bare and essential facts are that the appellant herein (original plaintiff) filed a suit against the respondent herein (original defendant) in the City Civil Court, Bombay praying therein that the defendant be permanently restrained by an order of injunction from dispossessing the plaintiff from the suit premises and/or entering into the suit premises that is Room No. 21, Kach Karkhana, G. D. Ambedkar Marg, Wadala Road, Bombay. The plaintiff averred that the suit premises were purchased by him from the defendant on 10-2-1992 for a consideration of Rs. 2 lakhs. The transaction is said to be evidenced by the affidavit of the defendant dated 10-2-1992 and the receipt of the even date. Upon payment of the entire consideration of Rs. 2 lakhs plaintiff asserts that he came in exclusive possession of the suit premises. According to him in the last week of May, 1992 when he returned from his native place, defendant started demanding more money for the suit premises and threatened that he would forcibly dispossess him. The plaintiff alleges that on 4-6-92, the defendant came to the suit premises with four unknown persons and began to threaten the plaintiff to vacate the suit premises. This act and threat of defendant necessitated plaintiff to file the present suit on 15-6-92. In the said suit, the plaintiff took out Notice of Motion which was registered as Notice of Motion No. 3388 of 92 praying therein that defendant, his servants and hirelings be restrained from dispossessing the plaintiff from the suit premises and/or entering into the suit premises. It appears that ad interim order was passed in terms of prayers-Clause (a) on 24-6-1992.

(3.) ACCORDING to the defendant after the ad-interim injunction was obtained by the plaintiff from the trial Court on 24-6-92, the plaintiff forcibly dispossessed the defendant on 8-7-92 at about 3 p. m. The defendant lodged the complaint before the Senior Inspector of Police, Matunga Police Station, Kings Circle, Bombay on 8-7-92 and, his lawyer also moved the Inspector of Police on 11-7-92. The defendant took out separate notice of Motion bearing No. 3986 of 92 praying therein that the ad interim stay order passed by the Court be vacated and he be restored possession.