RAM LAL Vs. RAMANAND MEENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE aforesaid revisions have been directed against the order dated 8.3.1996, passed by learned Additional District Judge No. 2, Alwar, reverising the order dated 14.2.1996, passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division) Alwar, and allowing the application of temporary injunction filed by the plaintiff -non -petitioner.

(2.) THE brief relevant facts of the case are that the auction for grant of royalty collection contract took place on 30.1.1996. The plaintiff -non -petitioner Ramanand gave a bid of Rs. 3,50,000/ - which was the highest. The Mining Engineer accepted the same and asked the plaintiff -non -petitioner to deposit 25% of the bid amount and security amount. The amount was not deposited by the plaintiff -non -petitioner on the same day. On 31.1.1996, the plaintiff - non -petitioner, on the opening of the office, submitted an application to the Mining Engineer for depositing the amount of Rs. 1,75,000/ - but the Mining Engineer refused to deposit the amount. Under such circumstances the plaintiff -non -petitioner sent a telegram in this connection to the Mining Engineer on the same day. On the same day the Mining Engineer gave a notice to the defendant -petitioner Ram Lal for depositing 25% amount of his bid, as his bid was the second highest and security amount. This notice was received by defendant Ram Lal the same day. He deposited the amount on the next day i.e. on 1.2.1996. On 2.2.1996, the plaintiff -non -petitioner filed a suit for injunction against the State of Rajasthan and the Mining Engineer, Alwar. He also filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 C.P.C.

(3.) MR . Ranjan, counsel for the defendant -petitioner submits that the Lower Appellate Court committed serious illegality in setting -aside the order of trial court which was neither perverse nor capricious. He submits that on this ground the revision deserves to be allowed. In support of his arguments, he placed reliance on a judgment of this Court, reported in Smt. Vimla Devi v. Jang Bahadur 1977 RLW 326.