RAJESH CHANDER GANDHIR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff has filed this revision-petition against the order of the Additional District Judge, Karnal, whereby the interim injunction granted by the trial Court was vacated.

(2.) Briefly put, the plaintiff filed suit challenging the notice asking him to deposit a sum of Rs. 22,251/- amount said to he due from M/s Naresh Kumar and Company as sales tax arrear for the year 1979-80 and he being one of the partners of the firm thus, liable to pay the same. The plaintiff replied to the notice specially denying that he was partner of the firm. In pursuance of the notice, he appeared in person before the Assistant Excise and Taxation Officer and gave his specimen signatures as well. Subsequently, the plaintiff received another notice asking him to deposit a further sum of Rs. 89781/. This time too, the plaintiff replied to the notice and also appeared before the concerned authority. It is further case of the plaintiff that specimen signatures sent for comparison to the Forensic Science Laboratory did not tally, yet defendant No. 2 was adamant to recover the amount or detain him forcibly. Hence this suit.

(3.) In this suit, the plaintiff also filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 Civil Procedure Code for the grant or interim injunction. The trial Court after weighing the prima facie evidence placed on record, came to the conclusion that defendants have miserably failed to prove prime-facie that plaintiff is one of the partners of the defaulting firm M/s Naresh Kumar and Company. Thus the Court confirmed the ex parte injunction already granting vide order dated 4th March, 1989.