Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: temporary injunction order in Sri. Vidya Sheersha Thirtharu vs Sri. Siddalingaiah on 8 August, 2019Matching Fragments
23. He further contended that the final relief has been granted while considering interlocutory application for Temporary Injunction. The trial Court has granted Temporary Injunction without considering irreparable injury and balance of convenience. Virtually, the trial Court has granted final relief by way of interim order, which is impermissible. He further contended that the order of the trial Court establishes a new state of things which is not permissible at the interim stage. The trial Court has held a mini trial which is impermissible at the time of granting interim injunction. The order of Temporary Injunction granted by the trial Court is contrary to public interest as the entire functioning of the Mutt, which is essentially of religious nature came to a standstill.
24. He would further contend that even a person not a party to suit can file an application under Order XXIII Rule 3A of the Code of Civil Procedure in the disposed of suit. Unless and until the judgment and compromise decree passed in O.S. No.376/2016 is set aside and declared that the appointment of Prof.D. Prahalada Char is null and void, the trial Court cannot grant Temporary Injunction in the present suit - O.S. No.231/2018 without even impleading the present petitioner and others who are parties to the compromise decree. When suit itself is not maintainable, question of granting Temporary Injunction would not arise. He would further contend that Prof. D. Prahaladachar functioning as Matadhipathi of the Mutt for the last 13 months. The trial Court granted Temporary Injunction by the impugned order without taking into consideration the public interest.
52. The trial Court by the impugned order while granting Temporary Injunction, at paragraphs 26 and 27 recorded a finding that the defendants 2 and 3 have entered into MOU, but the present plaintiffs are not parties to the said MOU and therefore it is not forthcoming as to whether the said compromise petition was agreed between the parties. The trial Court failed to notice that O.S. No.376/2016 is decreed in terms of the joint memo (Annexure-E in W.P. No.39961/2018) and the joint memo filed by the plaintiffs and the defendants was duly signed by all the plaintiffs and the defendant Nos.1 and 2 and their respective counsel. The same has not been considered by the trial Court while granting Temporary Injunction in favour of the plaintiffs. The suppression of the material facts also not considered. The trial Court proceeded to grant Temporary Injunction in the present suit mainly on the basis that there is no agreement between the plaintiffs and the defendants in O.S. No.376/2016 and the MOU is only between the defendant Nos.2 and 3 in O.S. No.376/2016 and further the post of Peethadhipathi as per Hindu Dharma is sacred one and whether it can be alienated is the subject matter of the suit and whether the plaintiffs are the devotees of Sri Vyasaraj Mutt also has to be decided at the time adjudication after the trial. The trial Court further recorded a finding that though the plaintiffs will not be put to any irreparable loss personally, keeping the tradition of the Mutt, application is allowed and Temporary Injunction is granted.
64. All the aspects stated surpa have not at all been considered by the Courts below. The Lower Appellate Court has not considered the maintainability of the suit in the light of the provisions of Order 1 Rule 8(3) and (4) r/w Order XXIII Rules 3 and 3A of the Code of Civil Procedure eventhough the specific ground was taken by the present petitioner in the appeal memo. On that ground also, the impugned order passed by the Lower Appellate Court cannot be sustained.
65. It is also relevant to state at this stage that though the order of Temporary Injunction granted by the trial Court on 18.8.2018 and affirmed by the Lower Appellate Court on 5.9.2018, this Court by an order dated 7.9.2018 granted an interim order staying the order of Temporary Injunction. The said interim order was extended from time to time and the same is still operating.