INDRAPURI STUDIO P LIMITED Vs. SHANTI DEBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application by the petitioner for extension of time to deposit an amount of rs. 12,000/-, which was due to be deposited within March last under the order of this court, dated September 7, 1965, passed in the connected appeal (F. M. A. No. 264 of 1965 ). In that appeal, the present petitioner was the respondent and the appeal was directed against an unconditional order of temporary injunction, made in favour of the petitioner by the trial court. The connected suit (T. S. No. 29 of 1964 of the 1st Court of the subordinate Judge at Alipore) was brought by the petitioner as plaintiff under Order 21, rule 63 of the Code of civil Procedure for setting aside the summary order or rejection of the petitioner's claim under Order 21, rule 58 of the Code in Misc. case No. 11 of 1962 of the 4th court of the Subordinate judge at Alipore, against the attachment of certain properties in T. Ex. case No. 29 of 1961 of the same court. In the said suit, which was, inter alia, for a permanent injunction, restraining the present opposite parties Nos. 1 and 2, who were defendants Nos. 1 and 2 in the suit, from proceeding with the above Ex. Case, the petitioner prayed for temporary injunction, that is, injunction pendente lite, which was granted by the learned trial Judge unconditionally, as aforesaid.

(2.) IN this court, the said order was varied in the above appeal only to this extent that it was made subject to certain conditions, one of them being that the petitioner was to deposit a sum of rs. 12,000/-, within March every year, in the court below, the first of such deposits to be made within March, 1966. That first deposit was duly made, but, for the next deposit, falling due in march, 1967, the instant application was made by the petitioner on March 21, 1967, for extension of time. It is to be noted here that, in the above order of this court, it was also expressly provided that the suit in question was to be heard out by the learned trial Judge within a year from the date of the said order, namely, September 7, 1965, at the latest.

(3.) THE suit, however, could not be disposed of within the above time-limit, fixed by this court, because the records did not reach the learned Subordinate judge before February 24, 1967. The suit is still pending and, although it was taken up for hearing, it has remained pending, as the records have since been called up to this court in connection with certain administrative matters.