- (1.) The opposite party as plaintiff filed Title Suit No.446 of 1986 before the 2nd Court of the learned Music at Sealdah against the petitioners, inter alias, for declaration that the alleged notice dated 16th September, 1986 refusing to renew the agency at off course centers was illegal, invalid and inoperative and also for permanent injunction restraining the petitioners from giving effect and /or further effect to the said notice, also restraining them from withholding supply of jack pot and Treble Totes Tickets to the opposite party at the rate of Rs. 5/- and Rs. 2.50 p. Respectively and also restraining them from withholding publication for his name as an agent of the petitioner No.1. The opposite party also filed an application for temporary injunction in the suit, inter alias, praying for restraining the petitioners from giving effect to the said notice and also restraining them from discontinuing the supply of Tack pot and Treble Totes Tickets at the rate of Rs.5/- and Rs. 2.50/ respectively to him and obtained an expert interim order on 11th November 1986. Against the said expert ad-interim injunction the petitioners have moved this court in revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The case as made out by the petitioners in their revisional application inter alias is that the petitioner No. 1 having an unregistered and/or unincorporated club and a private organization not being registered under the Society Registration Act and also not being a Company registered under the partnership Act, no suit lies against the petitioner No.1 and as such the trial court was wrong in granting an ad-interim injunction against the petitioner No.1. The petitioners have further stated that for the purpose of enlarging of course centers according to the sanction and/or approval of the State Government the petitioner No.1 engaged several agents for selling jack-pot and Treble Totes Tickets at the rate of Rs.5/- and Rs.2.50 p. at different of course centers and the opposite party was engaged as such an agent for selling such tickets unto 18th September, 1986. The monsoon seasons of Calcutta horse racing expired on 18th September 1986 and the engagement of the opposite party as an agent of the petitioner No.1 automatically stood terminated on that date on the expiry of the said monsoon season. After the said expiry, the petitioner No.1 decided not to continue the said off course centers and the sale of Jack pot and Treble Toted Tickets at the rate of Rs. 5/- and Rs. 2.50 p. only any more and it published a notification to that effect in the daily newspapers in the month of October 1986. Against the said decision of the petitioner No. 1, the opposite party herein and other erstwhile off course agents of the said petitioner moved a writ petition in the original side of this Hon'ble Court during the last Puja Holidays before this Courts on 18th October, 1986 and obtained an interim order restraining the petitioner No. 1 from giving effect and /or further effect to the aforesaid publication in the newspapers and also a mandatory order direction the said petitioner to supply usual tickets no jack pots and Treble Totes at the original rates i.e., at the rate of Rs. 5/- and Rs. 2.50 p, respectively. Subsequently on the application for vacating the said interim order made by the petitioner No. 1 herein, this Court on 23rd October, 1986 recalled the said interim order and passed an order to the effect that the petitioner No. 1 shall supply Jack pot and Treble Totes Tickets to the writ petitioners including the opposite party herein, at the rate of Rs. 10/- and Rs. 5/- respectively till 28th October, 1986 and the nature was fixed for hearing on 27th October, 1986. On 27th October, 1986 this Court was pleased to adjourn the mater on the prayers make by both parties till one week after the re-opening of the Hon'ble High Court after the puja Holidays and the said interim order dated 22nd October, 1986 was continued till 11th of November, 1986. The said writ application is still pending for final disposal but the said interim order, however, was not extended beyond November 11, 1986 and inspire of the pendency of the said writ application, the opposite party had filed the aforesaid suit thereby proceeding simultaneously in two forum in respect of the same matter and hence the trial court was wrong in granting the aforesaid ad-interim injunction.
(2.) Mr. B. K. Banerjee, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the opposite party however, has raised a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of the present provisional apposition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India on he ground that since the order granting ad-interim injunction passed in a Civil suit is Clearly an appealable under Order 43 Rule 1(r) of the Code of Civil Procedure no revision lies against such order and this Court should also not exercise the Superintending powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India in the matter and in support of his said contention reported to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Md. Yunus v. Md. Mustakim & Ors., reported in AIR 1984 SC 38.
(3.) Mr. Mukul Prokash Banerjee, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners in reply to the said preliminary objection however, has submitted that the existence of an alternative statutory remedy is no bar for moving an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India in the Hon'ble High Court and referred to the decisions in Ram & Shyam Co. v. State of Haryana & Ors. Reported in AIR 1985 SC 1147 and also Abanindra Kumar Maity v. A. K. Biswas, reported in AIR 1976 SC 2447 and an unreported judgment of this Court in the case of Hindustan Corporation Ltd. v. Hukumachand Rajkumar Singh Pvt. Ltd. (C. R. No. 2454 of 1982) in support of his said contention.;