Nagar Palika vs Naman Advertising and Another

Mahesh Bhagwati, J.—By way of the instant writ petition, the Petitioner has impugned the order dated 8th December, 2010, whereby the learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Gangapur City, allowed the interim mandatory injunction application filed by the Plaintiff-Respondent No. 1 and stayed the execution of the order dated 26.11.2010, vide which the contract of the Plaintiff was cancelled.

Having considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and carefully perused the relevant provisions of law as also the impugned order, it is noticed that the learned trial court after considering the rival submissions made by the parties allowed the interim mandatory injunction application on the ground that prior to passing the impugned order, principle of natural justice was not followed as no notice was found to have been served upon the Plaintiff Respondent No. 1.

Learned trial court is found to have rightly allowed the application filed by the Plaintiff-Respondent No. 1 and the impugned order is found to be based on pure findings of the facts. It is found to have suffered from no infirmity, conversely it is found to be just and apt .

Jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution cannot be exercised just with a view to upset the pure findings of facts. The extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 can be invoked only when the impugned order is found to be totally perverse or contrary to material or it results in manifesting injustice.

In view of above, the writ petition filed by the Petitioner being bereft of any merits deserves to be dismissed, which stands dismissed, accordingly.

Consequent upon the dismissal of writ petition, the stay application, filed therewith, does not survive and that also stands dismissed.