Alhaj Keramat Ali v. Nongmaithem Herojit Singh
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
The Civil Revision Petition is disposed of with the above directions
Provisions considered
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 O. 39 rr. 1, 3
- Constitution of India art. 227
Judgment
BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJAY KUMAR
09.06.2022 [1] OS. No. 25 of 2021 was filed by Nongmaithem Herojit Singh before the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Thoubal, for declaration of his right and authority to operate the oil pump, under the name and style of M/s. Keramat & Sons, at Yairipok, Bamon Leikai, Thoubal District, until the lease, as indicated in the money receipt dated 05.02.2021, was lawfully determined; and for a mandatory injunction to restrain Alhaj Keramat Ali and Md. Maqbul Ahmad, the defendants, from causing any disturbance to him and his men in the business of running the said oil pump. Judl. Misc. Case No. 53 of 2021 was filed in the said suit by Nongmaithem Herojit Singh under Order 39 Rules 1 & 3 CPC for an ex parte ad-interim injunction restraining the defendants and their men from entering into the premises of the oil pump and from disturbing him and his men in the peaceful operation of the oil pump, pending disposal of the suit. By order dated
19.06.2021 passed therein, the Trial Court granted an ex parte ad-interim injunction as prayed for. However, after hearing both sides, the Trial Court vacated the earlier order dated 19.06.2021 and rejected the injunction application, by its later order dated 15.07.2021. Aggrieved thereby, Nongmaithem Herojit Singh filed Civil Misc. Appeal Case No. 1 of 2021 before the learned District Judge, Thoubal. By order 3 dated 02.08.2021, the Appellate Court admitted the appeal and granted interim relief. The cryptic order passed by the Appellate Court reads thus: - ‘EXTRACT COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 02.08.2021 (Through Jitsi Meet VC) PRESENT: Ld. Counsel for the Appellants. Ld. Counsel for the Respondents. Heard at length. Admit it. Call for the records. In the meantime, the operation of the impugned order dated
15.07.2021 is stayed till the next date of hearing. Fix 09-08-2021 for W/O & hearing. An extract copy of this order be furnished to the O.C. Yairipok P.S. for information and compliance thereof.’ [2] It is against this order that the defendants filed the present CRP under Article 227 of the Constitution. While ordering notice before admission in the matter on 09.09.2021, this Court observed that perusal of the order dated
02.08.2021 passed by the learned District Judge, Thoubal, reflects that no reasons whatsoever were given for staying the reasoned order dated 15.07.2021 passed by the Trial Court, vacating the earlier injunction. It was on this basis that this Court granted interim suspension of the order dated 02.08.2021 passed by the learned District Judge, Thoubal, in Civil Misc. Appeal Case No. 1 of 2021. [3] Taking advantage of the order passed by this Court, it appears that the defendants secured possession of the disputed oil pump, the subject matter of the lis, on 10.09.2021. Alleging that this amounted to an act of contempt, the plaintiff filed Contempt Case (C) No. 3 of 2021 before this Court. He also filed MC(CRP) No. 14 of 2021 in the Civil Revision Petition seeking its dismissal on 4 the ground that the defendants had concealed the subsequent orders/ proceedings in Civil Misc. Appeal Case No. 1 of 2021 and to pass an order of status quo, obtaining as on 09.09.2021, with regard to possession, use and operation of the oil pump. [4] Heard Mr.
Juno Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioners in the civil revision petition/respondents in the miscellaneous case and the contempt case; and Mr. P. Tomcha, learned counsel for the respondent in the civil revision petition/applicant-petitioner in the miscellaneous case and the contempt case. [5] [6] Parties shall hereinafter be referred to as arrayed in the suit. At the outset, it may be noted that Civil Misc. Appeal Case No. 1 of 2021 is still pending consideration and therein, the Appellate Court is seized of the issue as to whether the Trial Court was justified in vacating the temporary injunction granted earlier. The only reason for this Court to entertain the revision petition was the failure of the Appellate Court to record reasons while staying the operation of the Trial Court’s reasoned order, vacating the temporary injunction granted earlier. Trite to state, reasons ought to have been furnished, as reasons constitute the heartbeat of every decision, as affirmed by the Supreme Court.
It is not correct and proper for a Court of Law to stay the operation of a reasoned order passed by a Lower Court without recording the reasons for such interference. It appears that the Appellate Court extended the interim order granted by it on 02.08.2021 even before this Court stayed the operation thereof, vide order dated 09.09.2021, and this fact was supressed by the defendants in the suit. 5 It is also an undisputed fact that the defendants secured possession of the disputed oil pump on 10.09.2021 by taking advantage of the stay order granted by this Court on 09.09.2021 in the Civil Revision Petition. The letter addressed by the Officer-in-Charge, Yairipok Police Station, to Mr. P. Tomcha, learned counsel, bears out this fact. It appears that a local club at Yairipok interfered in the matter in this regard. In any event, Mr. Juno Rahman, learned counsel, fairly concedes that after receipt of ₹. 60,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty Lakh only) from the plaintiff, the defendants delivered possession of the oil pump to him and that he was operating the said pump as on the date of institution of the suit. [7] These being the facts, this Court sees no purpose served in adjudicating the present revision on merits at this stage.
Operative part
It is for the Appellate Court to deal with the issue raised before it in the first instance and the mere failure on its part to record reasons for granting stay would not justify this Court going into the merits of the matter now. The matter is therefore remitted to the Appellate Court of the learned District Judge, Thoubal, to consider afresh as to what interim relief should be granted in the pending appeal, after hearing both sides again. The Appellate Court shall take into account the fact that the plaintiff was admittedly in possession of the disputed oil pump and was operating it as on the date of institution of the suit and thereafter consider the rival pleas of the parties on facts and in accordance with law. The Appellate Court shall then decide as to whether the Trial Court’s Order dated 15.07.2021 warranted interference pending disposal of the appeal. The Appellate Court shall pass a reasoned order 6 in this regard as expeditiously as possible and preferably within 1(one) month from the date of the receipt of a copy of this order. [8] The Civil Revision Petition is disposed of with the above directions.
In the light of this final order, no further orders are required to be passed in the miscellaneous case filed by the plaintiff. MC(CRP) No. 14 of 2021 is therefore dismissed. Though the defendants seem to have secured possession of the disputed oil pump, by taking advantage of the order passed by this Court on
09.09.2021, which clearly amounts to an act of overreaching on their part, this Court is not inclined to exercise contempt jurisdiction. Contempt Case(C) J2 No. 3 of 2021 is accordingly closed. In the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. Indrajeet CHIEF JUSTICE
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The Civil Revision Petition is disposed of with the above directions
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — O. 39 rr. 1, 3; Constitution of India — art. 227.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Manipur High Court, on 09 Jun 2022. The bench was SANJAY KUMAR.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.