UTTAM CHAND Vs. MANJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the order dated 4.7.2000 passed by the learned District Judge, Solan in Civil Misc. Appeal No. 15 -S/14 of 2000, the Plaintiff -Petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the Plaintiff) has preferred the present Revision Petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, undisputed facts leading to the presentation of this petition are as follows. The Plaintiff has instituted a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction against the Respondents/Defendants (hereinafter referred to as the Defendants) which is pending disposal in the Court of the learned Sub Judge 1st Class, Kandaghat. The suit is being contested by the Defendants. In the said suit the Plaintiff moved an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 Code of Civil Procedure also for issuance of temporary injunction against the Defendants on which ex -parte ad interim injunction was granted by the learned trial Judge vide his order dated 12.6.2000. The Defendants feeling aggrieved by the said order preferred an appeal in the court of learned District Judge, Solan who by the impugned order and without notice to the Plaintiff disposed of the appeal by remanding the matter to the trial court with the directions to dispose of the matter on priority basis. Feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the learned District Judge, the Plaintiff has preferred the present petition.

(3.) THERE is no dispute that the appeal has been disposed of by the learned District Judge without notice to the Plaintiff. Vide paras 3 and 4 of the impugned order the learned Sessions Judge has discussed the merits of the case between the parties on the basis of the material placed on the file of the appeal regarding ownership and possession of the suit properties and on the factual aspects of their situations and has observed that he failed to understand how the Plaintiff substantiated an ex -parte prima facie case in his favour for the issuance of the ex -parte injunction order against the Defendants -Appellants and that this is very important aspect which has decisive bearing on the entire controversy. Again vide Para 7 he observed that his observations are emanating from the records itself and are stark realities. He has further observed that these will have no effect on the opinion of the lower court. After having observed that his observations emanate from the record and are stark realities the further observations that these will have no effect on the opinion of the trial court are rendered for mal. Such observations touching the merits of the dispute between the parties could not have been and ought not to have been made by the learned District Judge while disposing of the appeal without notice to the Plaintiff. Thusin disposing of the appeal the learned District Judge has not only violated the principles of Natural Justice but has also acted with illegality in exercise of the jurisdiction which vested in him. therefore e, the impugned order being illegal cannot be sustained.