MANGAL THAKUR Vs. SUNDAR BHAGAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question which arises for decision in this case is whether the petitioner can be punished under Rule 2 (3) of Order 39 of the Civil P. C. for violating the undertaking given by him incorporated by the Court in its order disposing of an application for temporary injunction.

(2.) The suit has been filed by the plaintiff-opposite party for recovery of possession of the properties described in the schedules to the plaint and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from flowing their drain water and constructing any structure on the land and from changing its features. At the time of hearing of the in-junction matter, the defendants filed affidavits stating that they would maintain status quo and would not bring about any change therein. On this undertaking, the trial Court vacated the ad interim order of injunction earliar passed. The undertaking was specifically mentioned and it was expressly said that on that ground the injunction order was being withdrawn. Later on, the petitioner dug a drain and made certain changes in a wall standing on the land. The plaintiff complained before the trial Court. The Court held the petitioner guilty and directed him to be detained in civil prison for one week. On appeal, the order has been maintained. The petitioner has now come to this Court.

(3.) Mr. Chandra Sekhar contended that the petitioner could not be punished for breach of an injunction order as there was no order of injunction issued by Court.