HULASH CHAND GULGULIA Vs. RAJKUMAR GULGULIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE subject matter of challenge are the orders dated 18. 04. 2008, passed by the learned Civil Judge No. 1, Cachar, Silchar allowing the Misc. Appeal No. 7/2007, filed by the opposite party No. 1/plaintiff and granting temporary injunction as prayed for in M. C. No. 21/2008, filed by him. By this order in the miscellaneous appeal, the order dated 15. 03. 2008 passed by the learned Munsiff No. 2, Cachar, Silchar in M. C. No. 11/2002, refusing to grant temporary injunction to the opposite party No. 1/plaintiff, was interfered with. The subject matter of challenge are the orders dated 18. 04. 2008, passed by the learned Civil Judge No. 1, Cachar, Silchar allowing the Misc. Appeal No. 7/2007, filed by the opposite party No. 1/plaintiff and granting temporary injunction as prayed for in M. C. No. 21/2008, filed by him. By this order in the miscellaneous appeal, the order dated 15. 03. 2008 passed by the learned Munsiff No. 2, Cachar, Silchar in M. C. No. 11/2002, refusing to grant temporary injunction to the opposite party No. 1/plaintiff, was interfered with.

(2.) I have heard Mr. C. K. Sharma Baruah, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. M. Barthakur, Advocate for the appellant/defendant and Mr. G. N. Sahewalla, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. S. Senapati, Advocate for the opposite party No. 1/plaintiff, who has entered appearance through a caveat. The caveat stands discharged.

(3.) THE petitioner /defendant in his written objection, while questioning the identity of the suit land because of the wrong description thereof, contended that the construction of the boundary wall by him, by no means would adversely affect the use and enjoyment of the power house and transformer by the opposite party No. 1/plaintiff. No evidence was adduced by the parties and the learned trial Court by the order dated 15. 03. 2008, passed in M. C. No. 11/2002 (registered on the application for temporary injunction) rejected the same. The learned Lower Appellate Court by the order impugned, has not only interefered with the determination of the learned trial Court but also by order dated 18. 04. 2008, passed in M. C. No. 21/2008, registered on an application under Order 39 Rule 1 of the Code read with Section 151 thereof, filed in the appeal, granted temporary injunction as prayed for.