UMA BHOI Vs. SARGUL GRAM PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH hearing of the aforesaid Civil Revisions were taken up separately in some cases, yet the question of law involved on the maintainability of the Civil Revisions being common to all the Civil Revisions concerning the same provision of law under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short, 'the Code), therefore, this common judgment shall abide the result in all such Civil Revisions.

(2.) BEFORE dealing with the question of maintainability it is appropriate to indicate about the particulars of the orders which are under challenge in the aforesaid Civil Revisions. C. R.No. 432 of 2001 Judgment delivered on 29.9.2001 by the Addl. District Judge, Sonepur in Misc. Appeal No. 3 of 2001 is under challenge. Learned Addl. District Judge set aside the order temporary injunction granted by learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Rampur in M.J.C. No. 9 of 2000. C. R. No. 32 of 2002 Judgment delivered on 19.9.2001 by the Ad -hoc Addl. District Judge (Fast Track Court No. II), Cuttack in Misc. Appeal No. 145 of 1996 is under challenge. It appears from the impugned order that learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Cuttack granted temporary injunction in favour of the opposite party as per his order passed on 30.7.1996 in Misc. Case No. 39 of 1993 under Order, 39, Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. The appeal was dismissed by confirming to the said order of the trial Court. C.R.P. No. 64 of 2002 Judgment delivered on 10.5.2002 by the Ad -hoc Addl. District Judge (Fast Track Court), Balasore in Misc. Appeal No. 66 of 2001 is under challenge. It appears from that judgment that petitioners application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. vide Misc. Case No. 83 of 2001 was considered and allowed by learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Balasore, directing the parties to maintain status quo with respect to the suit land till disposal of Title Suit No. 143 of 2001. Learned Addl. District Judge vacated that order of status quo and accordingly allowed the appeal. C.R.P. No. 173 of 2002 Judgment delivered on 16.7.2002 by the Ad -hoc Addl District Judge (Fast Track Court), Balasore in Misc. Appeal No. 64 of 2001 is under challenge. It appears from that judgment that the order of temporary injunction passed by learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Balasore in Misc. Case No. 570 of 2000 was set aside and the appeal was allowed accordingly. C.R.P. No. 322 of 2002 Judgment delivered on 28.8.2002 by the Ad -hoc Addl. District Judge (Fast Tract Court No. III), Cuttack in Misc. Appeal No. 29/5 of 2001 -02 is under challenge. It appears from that judgment that in Misc. Case No. 192 of 2000 learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), 2nd Court, Cuttack on 16.3.2001 directed the parties to maintain status quo and that order was confirmed and the appeal was dismissed. C.R.P. No. 19 of 2003 Judgment delivered on 16.12.2002 by the Civil Judge(Sr. Division), Puri in Misc. Appeal No. 8/32 of 2001 is under challenge. It appears from that judgment that in Misc. Case No. 173 of 1999 under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. Learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Puri passed order of temporary injunction. The appellate Court confirmed to the said order and dismissed the appeal. C.R.P. No. 43 of 2003 Judgment delivered on 14.11.2002 by the Addl. District Judge, Kendrapara in Misc. Appeal No. 57 of 1999 is under challenge. It appears from that judgment that application for temporary injunction filed by the defendant/petitioner in Misc. Case No. 215 of 1998 in the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Kendrapara was allowed by that Court on 14.9.1999 and consequentially plaintiff was restrained by temporary injunction. Thus plaintiff preferred the aforesaid appeal. Learned Addl. District Judge dismissed the appeal by way of maintaining the order of injunction. C.R.P. No. 63 of 2003 Judgment delivered on 25.1.2003 by the Addl. District Judge, Bhadrak in F.A.O. No. 45 of 2002 is under challenge. It appears from that judgment that petitioner filed Misc. Case No. 132 of 2002 under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code. Learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Bhadrak rejected that application. Learned Addl. District Judge also dismissed the appeal. C.R.P. No. 97 of 2003 Judgment delivered on 5.2.2003 by the Ad -hoc Addl. District Judge (Fast Track Court), Jajpur in Misc. Appeal No. 2 of 2002 is under challenge. It appears from that judgment that on 14.12.2001 learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Jajpur allowed the Misc. Case No. 77 of 2001 and issued order of temporary injunction against the defendants. Learned Addl. District Judge dismissed the appeal. C.R.P. No. 181 of 2003 Judgment delivered on 15.3.2003 by learned District Judge, Cuttack in Misc. Appeal No. 97 of 2002 is under challenge. It appears from that judgment that learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), 1st Court, Cuttack on 17.8.2002 allowed the Misc. Case No. 70 of 2001 and granted temporary injunction against the defendants. Learned District Judge, after hearing both the parties, set aside that order, vacated the order of temporary injunction and accordingly allowed the appeal. C. R. P. No. 184 of 2003 Judgment delivered on 7.3.2003 in Misc. Judicial Appeal No. 19 of 2002 of Court of District Judge, Bolangir is under challenge. It appears from that impugned order that learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Patnagarh on 11.11.2002 dismissed the M.J.C. No. 17 of 2002 by rejecting the application for temporary injunction. Learned District Judge dismissed the appeal. C.R.P. No. 194 of 2003 Judgment delivered on 4.4.2003 by the First Addl. District Judge, Puri in Misc. Appeal No. 21/86 of 2003 -02 is under challenge. It appears from that judgment that Misc. Case No. 44 of 2002 filed under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code was heard and the prayer for temporary injunction was rejected as per the order passed on 10.5.2002. Learned Addl. District Judge maintained that order and dismissed the appeal. C.R.P. No. 200 of 2003 Judgment delivered on 10.5.2003 in Misc. Appeal No. 11 of 2003 of the Court of District Judge, Cuttack is under challenge. It appears from that judgment that in Civil Misc. Application No. 1 of 2003 learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), 2nd Court, Cuttack on 21.1.2003 declined to pass order of temporary injunction. Learned District Judge upheld the same and dismissed the appeal. C.R.P. No. 204 of 2003 Judgment delivered on 30.1.2003 by the Ad -hoc Addl. District Judge (Fast Track Court), Jajpur in Misc. Appeal No. 32 of 2000 is under Challenge. It appears from that order that learned Addl. District Judge set aside the order of temporary injunction granted by the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Jajpur in Misc. Case No. 117 of 2000. C. R. P. No. 233 of 2003 Judgment delivered on 13.5.2003 by the Ad -hoc Addl. District Judge (Fast Track Court), Dhenkanal in F.A.O. No. 3 of 2003 is under challenge. It appears from that judgment that learned Addl. District Judge maintained the order of status quo directed by learned Civil Judge (Sr.Division), Kamakshayangar in Misc. Case No. 22 of 2001.

(3.) IT is the settled principle of law that a decision on application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code either by allowing or by rejecting it, shall come within the meaning of the term 'case decided. There can be no quarrel on the principle.