filed the
present appeal on 19/12/2007, vide which the second
interim injunction application was dismissed by Ld. Civil
Judge.
2. I have heard ... 2007 no DAE bill is to be raised.
10. The second interim injunction application
refers to show cause notice dated 21/05/2007 received
concurrent jurisdiction will usually refuse to
interfere by issuance of a second injunction.
There is no established rule of exclusion which
would deprive a court ... injunction, while such refusal does not exclude
another coordinate court or Judge from
jurisdiction, yet the granting of the injunction
18
by a second Judge
suit property, thus compelling him to institute the second suit for declaration, injunction and partition. In the second suit, not only has Shri ... sought in the first suit is for a decree of permanent injunction, the second suit has a much wider amplitude for the reason that
represented by its Bishop at Tirunelveli and also for consequential injunction against the second defendant / revision petitioner, who is admittedly having his office at Tirunelveli ... posts as detailed in the annexure and for consequential permanent injunction restraining the second defendant at Tirunelveli, its men, subordinates, agents, etc from interfering
adversely affect
the right of the second respondent. Accordingly,
the submission made by the ld. Counsel for the
second respondent is not acceptable ... concurrent
jurisdiction will usually refuse to interfere by
issuance of a second injunction."
It is also well settled that even an irregular order
suit was for fixation of
boundary and for permanent prohibitory injunction. Second
respondent is the first defendant in the suit. First respondent was not
originally
while did not choose to pass any order of interim injunction restraining the second respondent/defendant from holding out as managing director of the first ... defendant-company is illegal, null and void and for permanent injunction restraining the second defendant from holding himself out or interfering with the affairs
defendant on 18.11.1987; this amount is still lying with the second defendant; therefore, the second defendant is liable to pay the same together with interest ... 4292/92 was filed to vacate the said injunction. But, the injunction was in force till 5.1.1993. Pursuant to the order made, the appellant
they are
t V' " "tentsitied for' the permanent injunction as sought for
and the suit ef the plaintiffs was partly decreed ... site
towards north of the the
trial court injunction.
Secondly, the course of
its speciļ¬c stand of
the open space
feet x 24 feet
Generic Web Trade Ltd. And Anr vs India Web Trade Llc And Anr on 7
