LAW Courses

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Order 39 rule 2a cpc

(Querist) 09 August 2012 This query is : Resolved 
Is an application under Order 39 Rule 2A can be treated as a seperate case and for that seperate notice will have to be given to the parties when the title suit is pending. please cite some case laws.
V R SHROFF (Expert) 09 August 2012
Not a separate case, but Fresh Application must be filed for Injunction [STAY ] BY THE PLAINTIFF.
COPIES OF APPLICATION u/ Order 39 Rule 2 of cpc WITH DOCUMENTS AND AFFIDAVITS MUST BE GIVEN TO ALL PARTIES.
R.K Nanda (Expert) 09 August 2012
No, not at all.Issue a court notice of it to OP.
surjit singh (Querist) 10 August 2012
Respected Sir,
The matter is like that, the plaintiff went for appeal against the non granting of injunction before the DJ, the DJ disposed the appeal giving status quo and for rehearing of the injunction petition. In the meantime after the passing of the the status quo order the O.P. violated the status quo order, the violation is reflected in the Commissioner's Report called by the court. Now the plaintiff have filed an application under O39 R2A which the court is treating as seperate case and has ultimately asked for paper publication,when the title suit relating to the same property is pending. The lawyer for the O.P. has refused to accept the copy of the Application under O39 R2A. What is the option left for the plaintiff. Whether the plaintiff go for the paper publication as per court or for approach any other authority.
Advocate Bhartesh goyal (Expert) 10 August 2012
Petition under order 39 rule 2A of civil procedure code is filed when one of the party to suit diobey the order of court.Such petition is registerd separately and treat as separate suit. If opposite party avoides service of it's notices then send the same by regd post or get service of notice by substitue service.
surjit singh (Querist) 10 August 2012
Thank you sir, Can I have the indulgence of asking for any decided case relating to this procedural matter if any, because the Civil Court Rule of the Patna High Court is totally silent on this matter.
Kumar Doab (Expert) 23 May 2018
Bare acts > Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 > Order 39 Rule 2 A:
2A.Consequence of disobedience or breach of injunction.- (1) In the case of disobedience of any injunction granted or other Order made under rule 1 or 2 or breach of any of the terms on which the injunction was granted or the Order made, the court granting the injunction or making the order, or any court to which the Suit or proceeding is transferred, may Order the property of the person guilty of such disobedience or breach to be attached, and may also Order such person to be detained in the civil prison for a term not exceeding three months, unless in the meantime the court directs his release.
(2) No attachment made under this rule shall remain in force for more than tone year at the end of which time, if the disobedience or breach continues, the property attached may be sold and out of the proceeds, the court may award such compensation as it thinks fit to the injured party and shall pay the balance, if any, to the party entitled thereto.

HIGH COURT AMENDMENT
Patna.- Insert the words and figures or Section 151” after the word and figure “Rule 2” and before the words “or breach of any”, (Noti. No. 2431R. dated 3.8.1979).
http://www.lawzonline.com/bareacts/civil-procedure-code/order39-rule2A-code-of-civil-procedure.htm
Kumar Doab (Expert) 23 May 2018


Local counsels can help you.
In the meantime you may go thru;
You may go thru;
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CMP No. 158 of 2012 in RSA No. 110 of 2007 alongwith Review Petition No.133 of 2015 Reserved on:11.7.2017 Decided on: 27.7. 2017 Kaushalya Devi. …Applicant/appellant. Versus Kaushalaya Devi and others. …Respondents.
53..It is surprising, if not shocking, that inspite of the application lying pending for such a long time and despite the respondents having sufficient time at their disposal neither tendered apology nor offered to purge the contempt. There is no remorse whatsoever on their part. Therefore, this Court is left with no other option to allow the application by directing the respondents to first purge the contempt.
http://164.100.138.228/casest/cis/generatenew.php?path=../../casest/orders/orders/2015/&fname=206100001332015_2.pdf&smflag=N


You need to be the querist or approved LAWyersclub expert to take part in this query .


Click here to login now



Similar Resolved Queries :





Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query