Pramod Kumar Srivastava, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant on admission of second appeal and perused the record.
(2.) Original Suit No. 340/2014 (Shiv Kumar v. Usha Devi) , was filed for the relief of permanent injunction, in which the plaintiff had moved an Application '6-C' for interim injunction. After hearing said interim injunction application 6-C was allowed on 20.10.2014 by trial court and the defendants were directed not to evict the plaintiff from the disputed property, otherwise than in accordance with law.
(3.) Against the said order dated 20.10.2014 Misc. Civil Appeal no. 17/2014 Usha Devi v. Shiv Kumar and another , was preferred under Order 18 CPC. After hearing the parties, learned Additional District Judge, Court No.-3, Etawah, had dismissed the said misc. civil appeal by its judgment dated 28.10.2015. Against the said judgment dated 28.10.2015, of lower appellate court, the defendants of original suit had preferred a petition under Article 227 No. 986/2016 Smt. Usha Devi v. Shiv Kumar and another . The said petition was dismissed by following orders dated 18.02.2016:- Heard learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India has been filed challenging the judgment and decree passed by the 1st appellate court in a suit for injunction. This suit for injunction filed by the contesting respondent was decreed by the Civil Judge (SD), Etawah. The consequential appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed and, thereafter, this writ petition has been filed. The statutory remedy available to the petitioner is by means of a second appeal, which has not been availed. Under the circumstances, this writ petition is dismissed on the ground of availability of statutory alternative remedy. Upon the petitioner supplying a photostat copy of the impugned judgment, the office may return the certified copy while returning the photostat copy on record . After the order dated 18.02.2016 of this Curt as above, the defendant had preferred second appeal. ;