TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 1647X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... application is limited. If two views are possible, then the view taken by learned trial court has to be maintained. Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Maharwal Khejwaji Trust (Regd.) Faridkot Vs Baldev Dass [ 2004 (10) TMI 638 - SUPREME COURT ] has held that unless and until a case of irreparable loss or damage is made out by a party to the suit, the court should not permit a change of the said status quo, which may lead to loss or damage being caused to the party who may ultimately succeed and may further lead to multiplicity of proceedings - In the present case, the dispute is regarding a passage 7.5 ft. in width. Plaintiffs (petitioners herein) apprehend that the defendants ( respondents herein) will increase the height of the passa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ited others Vs Municipal Corporation of Mumbai another reported in (2012) 4 SCC 689. Para 19 20 of the said judgment are reproduced below:- 19. We have considered the respective submissions and carefully scrutinized the record. The scope of the appellate Court's power to interfere with an interim order passed by the Court of first instance has been considered by this Court in several cases. In Wander Ltd. v. Antox India (P) Ltd 1990 Supp SCC 727, the Court was called upon to consider the correctness of an order of injunction passed by the Division Bench of the High Court which had reversed the order of the learned Single Judge declining the respondent's prayer for interim relief. This Court set aside the order of the Divis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (P) Ltd (supra), N.R. Dongre v. Whirlpool Corpn. (1996) 5 SCC 714 and observed: The ratio of the abovenoted judgments is that once the court of first instance exer cises its discretion to grant or refuse to grant relief of temporary injunction and the said exercise of discretion is based upon objective consideration of the material placed before the court and is supported by cogent reasons, the appellate court will be loath to interfere simply because on a de novo consideration of the matter it is possible for the appellate court to form a different opinion on the issues of prima facie case, balance of convenience, irreparable injury and equity. 3. It is thus apparent that scope of interference by learned appellate court with learn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... all the three factors i.e. prima facie case; balance of convenience irreparable loss directed the parties to maintain status quo vide order dated 11.12.2018. A perusal of the order passed by learned trial court indicates that learned trial court was justified in directing the parties to maintain status quo in order to maintain and preserve the property. Thus, learned appellate court was not justified in interfering with the discretionary order passed by learned trial court. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The order passed by learned appellate court is set aside. 9. Learned counsel for the parties give undertaking on behalf of their clients that nature of the passage will not be changed during pendency of the suit. Lear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
