R CHINNASWAMY GOUNDER Vs. C H LAXMINARAYANA HARIYACHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant in this appeal is the plaintiff and has challenged the order passed by the Civil Judge, Mysore on 18th December 1970 allowing IA. No.6 vacating the injunction order granted in favour of the plaintiff and appointing the Tahsildar, Mysore Taluk as the receiver to take possession of the suit schedule properties and to manage and cultivate the same.

(2.) The plaintiff has filed OS. No.144/69 on 3-11-1969 for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's possession and enjoyment of the suit land. The case of the plaintiff is that he has been cultivating the land as tenant under the first defendant since 25th July 1956 agreeing to pay a cash annual rent of Rs.300. His further case is that defendants 1 to 3 have colluded and are trying to destroy his right as a tenant and so has filed the suit seeking permanent injunction. An application for interim injunction was filed. The learned trial Judge issued an order of interim injunction and after notice to the defendants has confirmed the order of temporary injunction on 29-1-1970. Thereafter on 3-9-1970 an application, out of which the present miscellaneous appeal arises, was filed praying for the appointment of a receiver. In the affidavit filed by Defendant-2 in support of the application, it is stated at paragraphs 2 and 3 as follows:

(3.) An objection statement was filed by the plaintiff stating that he had not caused damage to the estate by removing the pump set and cutting the trees. It was stated that the second defendant and others were trying to achieve their object of throwing the plaintiff out of the suit land by filing this application. It was specifically stated that "I have not damaged the cocoanut trees, mango trees, tamarind trees and jarnbo trees in any manner and much less made an attempt to sell them'.