STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD. Vs. AMIT CONSTRUCTION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . This Revision petition is directed against the order dated 20th September, 2000, passed by the learned 1st Additional District Judge, Bokaro in Misc. Appeal No. 51/2000, whereby, even while issuing directions to the trial Court to hear the injunction application on 23rd, September, 2000, he summarily and cryptically rejected the petitioners prayer for setting aside the status quo granted by the trial Court on 7th, September, 2000.

(2.) AS per the office note, the respondent No. 1 has been served, but no one appears on its behalf.

(3.) VERY disturbingly and distressingly I find that the trial Court, by violating all norms, based an ex parte ad interim injunction order in favour of the plaintiff and against the petitioner -defendant with regard to the maintenance of status quo, bul without recording any reasons as to how and why the trial Court was granting an ad interim injunction at an ex parts stage without issuing notice and without hearing the defendant in the suit. More distressingly I find that the appellate Court i.e., learned 1st Additional District Judge, even while preponding the injunction application to 23rd September, 2000 rejected summarily the petitioners prayer for setting aside the status quo order even though the petitioner had repeatedly advanced arguments to show as to how and in what manner the status quo order was causing acute hardships to the petitioner and was working to its grave prejudice. It was the bounden duty of the learned 1st Additional District Judge to have taken into consideration these submissions of the petitioner and should have recorded reasons as to why was it not inclined to allow the petitioners prayer for setting aside the status quo order.