UTTAM KUMAR SAHA Vs. MAYA RANI SAHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff's prayer for grant of ad interim injunction having been rejected by the learned Trial Judge vide Order No.2 dated 16th November, 2009, the plaintiff preferred an appeal being Misc. Appeal No. 565 of 2009 before the learned District Judge, 13th Court at Alipore. The said appeal was disposed of on contest on 17th May, 2010. The order which was impugned in the said appeal was set aside and the ad interim order of injunction which was passed by the learned District Judge in the said appeal on 21st November, 2009 by restraining the petitioner's herein from acting upon or from taking further steps in terms of the resolution purported to have been passed on October 24, 2009, was made absolute by the said order. The propriety of the said order is under challenge in this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India at the instance of the defendant/petitioner herein. Mr. Ray Chowdhury, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the petitioner, submits that the learned Appeal Court was not justified in making the ad interim order of injunction passed by the learned District Judge absolute in the said appeal while the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction is yet to be decided on merit by the learned Trial Judge.

(2.) Mr. Ray Chowdhury thus submits that this part of the impugned order is required to be clarified and/or modified so that the ad interim order of injunction which was passed by the learned Appeal Court is not allowed to continue beyond the disposal of the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction. Mr. Ray Chowdhury further submits that if the impugned order is allowed to remain on record, then there will be nothing left for consideration in the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction and the petitioner will not get any opportunity to place his objection against the plaintiff's prayer for temporary injunction.

(3.) Mr. Sen, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the opposite party, does not dispute such contention of Mr. Ray Chowdhury. Mr. Sen, after discussing the scope of the said appeal submits in his usual fairness that while considering an appeal arising out of an order of rejection of the plaintiff's prayer for ad interim injunction passed by the learned Trial Judge, the Appeal Court cannot direct that the ad interim order of injunction will continue till the disposal of the suit.