IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 13.06.2008
Coram
The Honourable Mr.Justice S.RAJESWARAN
C.R.P.(PD) No.1780 of 2008
in
M.P.No.1 of 2008
1.India Evangelical Lutheran Church
a Registered Society,
rep. by its General Secretary,
No.321, Lutheran Compound,
K.P. Road. Nagercoil.
2.Rev.J.Samual,
The President IELC,
OSLC, Oorgam, KGF,
Karnataka.
3.Rev.J.M.B.Sudhakaran
Secretary IELC,
General Secretary,
Indian Christian Research Organisation,
No.418, VIIth -B, Main Road,
HRBR I Block, Bangalore-43. ... Petitioners
Vs.
1.A.Vijayakumar
Correspondent and Managing Trustee,
St.John's Group of Colleges,
No.36, Tollgate, Muthanna Nagar,
Vellore, Vellore District. ... Respondent
Civil Revision Petition has been filed Under Section 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the impugned order dated 29.04.2008 made in I.A.No.622 of 2008 in O.S.No.334 of 2008 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Vellore.
For Petitioners : Mr.G.Ethirajulu
For Respondent : Mr.T.Sathish
O R D E R
The Civil Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the order dated 29.04.2008 made in I.A.No.622 of 2008 in O.S.No.334 of 2008 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Vellore.
2. The defendants 1 to 3 have filed the civil revision petition against the order passed by the trial Court on 29.04.2008 made in I.A.No.622 of 2008 in O.S.No.334 of 2008 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Vellore.
3. The trial Court granted an expart order on 29.04.2008 as follows:-
“Heard, perused the records and affidavit, prima facie case made out and interim injunction granted till 15.06.2008 on condition that petition to be disposed within 30 days, injunction notice to respondents order 39 Rule 3 CPC shall be complied with.”
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners/defendants submitted that the order passed by the Court below is against the provision of law, particularly Order 39 Rule 3 CPC, according to which, reasons should be given by the trial Court if an order of injunction is granted without ordering notice to the other side. The learned counsel further pointed out that this Court repeatedly held that this kind of cryptic orders should not be passed by the Court below. Therefore, he contends that the injunction order should be set aside.
5. It is not in dispute that a cryptic order of injunction has been passed by the trial Court in blatant violation of Order 39 Rule 3 CPC. Hence, I set aside the order dated 29.04.2008 passed by the Court below, thereby the civil revision petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P.is closed.
6. It is always open to the revision petitioners to file a counter immediately to the injunction application and on such counter being filed, the trial Court shall take up the application and consider the same on merits in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of filing of the counter by the revision petitioners. The revision petitioners are directed to file their counter within two weeks from the date of receiving a copy of this order.
13.06.2008
rrg
Index : Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
To
The District Munsif Court,
Thiruvallur.
S.RAJESWARAN,J.
rrg
CRP(PD)No.1780 of 2008
13.06.2008
C.R.P.(NPD) No.1239 of 2007
29-11-2007