Ad interim injunction, dismissal of i.a- appeal - tresspass by the respondent in the schedule damagi
nagarajupatro
(Querist) 18 December 2014
This query is : Resolved
Respected experts please guide in the matter.
One titupati running his business in municipal shop. Earlier Said shop was allotted to his father, later the same shop was re-allotted to one S.C candidate Anand, even then on oral agreement tirupati's father continued in the same shop, after his death tirupati maintaining said since 7 years, recently Anand forced tirupati to vacate the shop and tried to dispossess from the schedule, then tirupati approached lower court got Adinterim injunction against Anand, the learned judge dismissed the petition after 4 months, stating that injunction cannot be continued against the true owner and petitioner failed to prove his possession and petitioner did not filed any document showing his possession except the D&O Trader license receipts issued by the municipality and the respondent has submitted rent payment chalans. Whereas the respondent in his written statement story admitted that when he was out of station petitioner entered in the shop by breaking lock - That word itself shows the possession of the petitioner over the petition schedule. Further the respondent contended that he is the real owner and the petitioner is his servant, whereas he failed to submit his business licenses issued by the municipality and to prove that the petitioner is his servant. Even though the lower court favoured the respondent.
The lower court delayed in issuing certified copies of its judgement/decretal order, eventhough poor petitioner approached the Dist. Court in time filed C.M.A (appeal) on which the appellate court ordered for urgent notice to the respondent. As the case stands so... the respondent immediately after the dismissal of I.A (Vacation of Ad interim) stated harassing the petitioner tried to tress pass into the suit schedule, pending trial of main suit and appeal and damaged the front part of that shop, on that petitioner reported the matter to police, but in vain, appeal stand posted to next month 25th.
at this stage please clarify that :
(a) Whether the respondent can interfere with the possession of the petitioner over the suit schedule and alter the shape of the shop, just on dismissal of temporary injunction petition, pending appeal and main suit.
(b) Since there is time prescribed for appeal and preferring appeal in time, in such case what is the interpretation of the order of the lower court i.e, dismissal of I.A, whether the previous position i.e, adinterim injunction still continue till the disposal of appeal or in between the appeal time there will not be any such legal obligation of not entering respondent in the schedule as the appeal and main suit are pending.
(c) whether it can be treated as contempt of court or not, what action should be taken against the respondent for urgent relief, If the respondents enters and threatens the petitioner pending cases in the courts.
Please advise at the sooner to help a poor petitioner to safeguard his right to live and to restrict the high handed acts of the wealthy respondent
please quote the decisions infavour of the petitioner immediately to protect a young guy, who is the sole breadwinner for his family.
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 19 December 2014
1. Yes, he can but that would give rise fresh cause of action for remedy for the aggrieved party.
2.Ad interim order will go with the dismissal of the main injunction petition.
3.If no interim order is violated , contempt does not happen.
Pursue the appeal. Taking extra judicial measures during the pendency of appeal is not so easy and very unlikely.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 19 December 2014
1. Yes he can.
2. Injunction suit dismissed as well as ad interim.
3. No contempt of court occurred.
ajay sethi
(Expert) 19 December 2014
agree with MR Barman
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 20 December 2014
Although it is too long query to be posted and advised by experts at this platform yet I agree with expert Mr. Devajyoti Barman
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 24 December 2014
