RAMA BHAT Vs. MAHDA DAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE High Court does not ordinarily interfere in revision where the impugned order is appealable to the District Judge but such appeal has been preferred or if preferred, the same has subsequently been withdrawn. But in view of the peculiar circumstances of the case, it can justifiably be treated as an exception to this general rule. Here the learned Munsiff has narrated the facts and observed: "After going through the material on record, I pass the following order with terms and conditions: That non applicants are allowed to construct the cow shed subject - to the production of bond stating therein that if case is decreed in favour of the plaintiff, the non -applicants shall have to demolish the construction at their own cost and they shall have to ply damages to the tune of Rs. 300/ - This bond shall be furnished within one week from today. With these terms and conditions, order passed.

(2.) THIS is no order in the eye of law. The learned Munsiff has nowhere spelt out the considerations which entered into his mind in permitting the plaintiff to raise the construction over the disputed land pending final disposal of the suit. It is true that the order is a discretionary order but the discretion has to be exercised on well established principles governing the grant of temporary injunction. The learned Munsiff has nowhere referred to those principles muchless applied the same. He has not even tried to marshall the facts. This is absolutely an arbitrary order un -sustainable in law.

(3.) ALLOWING this revision petition, I set aside the order and direct that the learned Munsiff shall pass fresh orders in accordance with law after hearing the parties. The learned Munsiff will decide the matter within one week from the date hereinafter fixed for Appearance of the parties before him, and report compliance to the Deputy Registrar, Srinagar. The parties are directed to appear before the Munsiff Anantnag on 22nd of September, 1980.