RAJBAHADUR SINGH Vs. HANUMAN SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned counsel for the appellant is directed to implead the plaintiff in the suit as party-respondents in the present appeal. Put up after two weeks as prayed for.

(2.) It has been noticed by the Court that a very strange practice is being followed in the subordinate Courts, wherein all the parties to the suit are not shown in the cause-title of the application seeking temporary injunction under Order 39 of CPC, and only those pa. ties against whom the reliefs are sought are made parties.

(3.) It is axiomatic that though the application for temporary injunction is separately registered, it is always filed in the respective suit only as envisaged in Order 39, Rule 1 of CPC, and therefore all the parties to the suit would be the parties in the application for temporary injunction also, and their names must appear in the cause-title of the suit alongwith the number of the suit, though the reliefs might have been sought against some of the parties only. It is also required to be noted that sometimes the relief of temporary injunction is sought by one defendant against the other defendant in the application for temporary injunction without showing the name of the plaintiff in the cause-title of such application, as has been done in the instant case. In such cases, the plaintiff who has filed the suit against the defendants would be unaware of the orders passed in the application for temporary injunction filed by the defendants inter se. It is therefore not only desirable but mandatory to join all the parties to the suit as the parties in the T.I. Application, in order to void any complications in the suit and to avoid conflicting orders in the it.