Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
2272/2011 on 10 August, 2011
Author: Prasenjit Mandal
Bench: Prasenjit Mandal
1 10.8.11
C.O. 2272 of 2011 Basudev Mr. Dipankar Dandapath
- For the Petitioners.
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.
This application is at the instance of the defendants and is directed against the order being no. 11 dated April 7, 2011 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 2nd Court, Kandi in title Suit being no. 122 of 2010 thereby restoring the order of vacation of the hearing of the application for temporary injunction.
The short fact is that the plaintiffs-opposite parties herein instituted a suit being Title Suit 122 of 2010 for declaration of title, permanent injunction and other reliefs. At the time of filing of the suit, they filed an application for temporary injunction. They also prayed for ad-interim injunction at the same time. The learned trial Judge granted the ad- interim injunction and such order of ad-interim injunction was extended from time to time. Ultimately, the said order of ad-interim injunction was vacated by an order dated April 4, 2011. Thereafter the plaintiffs filed a petition for restoration of the order which was vacated on April 4, 2011. That application was allowed on payment of compensation of Rs. 200/-.
Being aggrieved by such order, this application has been preferred.
Upon hearing the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and on going through the materials on record, I find that the order impugned does not suffer from any material irregularity or errors of law. The fact remains that as soon as the order of status quo was vacated on April 4, 2011 when no application for extension was filed on April 4, 2011, the plaintiffs filed a petition for restoration on April 7, 2011 by putting up the record. That application was heard in presence of both the parties and the prayer was allowed on payment of compensation of Rs. 200/-. I think that the plaintiffs took prompt 2 action and the order dated April 4, 2011 was vacated within three days upon payment of adequate compensation.
This being the position, there is no scope of interference with the order impugned. However, I am told that the next date is fixed in the middle of August, 2011 for hearing the application for temporary injunction.
Learned trial Judge is directed to take up the application for temporary injunction for hearing on the date fixed and if necessary, he shall take up the hearing of the said application on day to day basis and in any way he shall dispose of the same within two weeks from the date of completion of the hearing.
This revisional application is disposed of in the manner as indicated above.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Urgent xerox certified copy, if applied for, be given to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners upon compliance of necessary formalities.
(Prasenjit Mandal, J.) 3