AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sanjay Kumar, CJ
Original Suit No. 5 of 2020 was filed before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Senapati, by the respondents herein for declaration of their title over the suit land and the consequential relief of possession, by evicting the defendant and demolishing the existing structures standing on the suit land. They also filed Judl. Misc. Case No. 8 of 2021 in the suit under Order 39 Rule 2 CPC for an injunction restraining the defendant from receiving the compensation in relation to the suit land in the context of the expansion/extension of National Highway No. 37.
However, by order dated 25.08.2021, the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Senapati, held that the injunction petition was premature and dismissed the same.
Aggrieved thereby, the plaintiffs in the suit filed Misc. Appeal Case No. 1 of 2021 before the learned District Judge, Senapati.
Two separate orders were passed by the learned District Judge, Senapati, on 07.09.2021. By one order, the learned District Judge granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction to hold back the compensation in respect of the suit land, which was to be acquired for extension/expansion of National Highway No. 37 until the disposal of the suit and set aside the order dated 25.08.2021 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Senapati.
However, by the second order passed on the very same day, the learned District Judge ordered notice to be issued to the respondent, the defendant in the suit, and fixed 05.10.2021 for his appearance and objections. Aggrieved by the orders passed by the learned District Judge, Senapati, the defendant in the suit is before this Court by way of this revision filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
Heard Mr. Ajoy Pebam, learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant; and Mr. D. Julius Riamei, learned counsel for the respondents/plaintiffs.
Perusal of the injunction order dated 07.09.2021 passed by the learned District Judge, Senapati, reflects in no uncertain terms that only an ad-interim order was granted thereby, as it was passed at a stage when the respondent therein had not even been put on notice. It appears that, by oversight, the learned District Judge, Senapati, set-aside the order dated 25.08.2021 which was under appeal before him at that stage itself.
Having ordered notice to the respondent/defendant by way of a separate order passed on the very same day, the learned District Judge, Senapati, could not have allowed the appeal straightaway. Mr. Ajoy Pebam, learned counsel, would inform this Court that, in the light of the ambiguity in the order passed by the learned District Judge, Senapati, the appeal itself is being treated as having been disposed of and the petitioner was altogether denied an opportunity of hearing before the learned District Judge, Senapati.
The injunction order dated 07.09.2021 therefore has to be read down to be just an ad-interim injunction order and the appeal would have to be heard and adjudicated after appearance of the respondent therein and upon his filing objections.
As the second order dated 07.09.2021 clearly shows that the appeal is still pending consideration and the next date was also given for the appearance and objections of the respondent therein, this Court is of the opinion that it would not be necessary at this stage to venture into the merits of the matter and it is for the Appellate Court of the learned District Judge, Senapati, to consider and decide the appeal on its own merits after hearing both sides.
The observation in the injunction order dated 07.09.2021 passed by the learned District Judge, Senapati, to the effect that the impugned order dated 25.08.2021 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Senapati, is set aside shall therefore stand deleted. The injunction order shall be treated as an ad-interim injunction order and the respondent therein, viz., the petitioner, shall be given an opportunity to enter appearance and file his objections. The learned District Judge, Senapati, shall thereafter consider the appeal on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
The Civil Revision Petition is disposed of accordingly.
In the light of this final order, MC (CRP(CRP.Art.227) No. 3 of 2022, filed for interim relief, shall stand closed.
In the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs.