Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

NAHAR SINGH versus THAKUR BIHARI JEE MAHARAJ MANDIR AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Nahar Singh v. Thakur Bihari Jee Maharaj Mandir And Others - WRIT - C No. 14027 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 5593 (8 March 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

HON'BLE UMESHWAR PANDEY, J.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The petition challenges the order of the trial court dated 30.7.2005 and the judgment and order passed by the appellate court dated 7.12.2005 whereby the application of the respondent for temporary injunction has been allowed directing the petitioner-defendant to maintain status quo on the property.

The property is a landed property given on lease to the petitioner by the respondent. The land was given only for the purposes of keeping wooden 'Tall' in the said land, but now since the petitioner-defendant proposes to install a saw machine therein occasion arose for filing the suit. Under these circumstances, the trial court as well as the appellate courts have granted the injunction in favour of the respondent restraining the petitioner and directing him to maintain status quo on the property.

It is not disputed that the initial contract between the parties regarding the lease is that for keeping wooden 'Tall' in the land in question. Obviously no permission was given at the time of creation of the lease nor at any subsequent stage for installing saw machine etc. Therefore, the discussion as made in the impugned order and judgment of the courts below is only to the effect that the defendant-petitioner would not be left at liberty for installing any saw machine in that land. The orders do not appear to be erroneous in any manner as to warrant an interference in this petition which is without force.

The petition fails and is hereby dismissed.

08.03.2006

SUA/14027


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.