High CourtsSingle Bench(2021) 02 MP CK 0030

Pushpa Pandey vs Mathura Prasad Pandey And Others

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 2 February 2021

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjay Dwivedi, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.345 Of 2021

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 230 words

Sanjay Dwivedi, J

By the instant petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 22.12.2020 (Annexure-P/1) passed by the Court below rejecting the application

filed under Section 151 of C.P.C. asking injunction against th defendants/respondents saying that during the pendency of the suit they be restrained

from alienating the property in question.

On earlier occasion, the application filed by the plaintiff/petitioner under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of CPC was entertained and the trial Court granted

injunction in favour of the plaintiff but lateron appeal was preferred and that order was reversed, against which, a writ petition was filed and the same

was dismissed by the High Court directing the trial Court to conclude the trial within 10 months. However, the trial could not be concluded in the

stipulated time, therefore, application under Section 151 of CPC was filed, which was rejected by the trial Court saying that there is no change of

circumstance and earlier application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC since dismissed, no further application under Section 151 of CPC granting

injunction in favour of the plaintiff can be entertained.

I do not find any infirmity and illegality in the impugned order passed by the Court below.

The petition being without any substance, is hereby dismissed.

However, the trial Court is further directed to conclude the trial expeditiously within a period of one year.