JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) THE petitioners had earlier filed a Writ Petition No. 55751 of 2004, which was disposed of finally by a learned Single Judge of this Court by judgement and order
dated 23.12.2004. By that order the learned Single Judge directed the trial Court to
decide the application of the petitioners for interim injunction in suit No. 684 of 2004
expeditiously and further directed that till the disposal of the application for interim
injunction, the parties shall maintain status quo.
(2.) BY this writ petition the petitioners want enforcement of that order of status quo passed by the learned Single Judge. If the order has been violated during its
continuance, the normal remedy is to file a civil contempt petition before the Single
Judge Bench dealing with such contempt matters. According to the learned counsel for
the petitioners, such a civil contempt application has already been filed and the same is
pending.
We are of the opinion that normally for an enforcement of a final order of a learned Single Judge of this Court a fresh writ petition before a Division Bench should not be
entertained because firstly, it would amount to permitting Bench hunting tactics on the
part of litigants, by giving them the unfettered choice to go before the Single Judge
Contempt Bench or the Division Bench dealing with civil misc. writ petitions.
(3.) SECONDLY and more importantly it would involve the risk that having argued the contempt petition before the Single Judge Civil Contempt Bench and not finding the
Bench in favour, the litigant may be tempted to approach the different Division Bench
by means of misc. writ petition.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.