Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 1608 (MAD)

H. Thiagaraj v. Maryammal

2011-03-22

M.DURAISWAMY

body2011
Judgment :- 1. The Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the defendants challenging the fair and final order in C.M.A.No.8 of 2009 on the file of the Sub Court, Udhagamandalam, reversing the fair and final order in I.A.No.396 of 2009 in O.S.No.75 of 2009 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Udhagamandalam. 2. The plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction in O.S.No.75 of 2009 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Udhagamandalam. In the said suit, the plaintiff filed an application in I.A.No.396 of 2009 for an ad interim injunction, restraining the respondents from in any manner making use of the property of the firm Sree Sakthi Tea Industry, using the Firm's name Sree Sakthi Tea Industry and from carrying on business in manufacture and sale of tea in the premises generally known as Sree Sakthi Tea Industry, situated at Thummanatty, Thummanatty Village, Udhagamandalam Taluk, The Nilgiris, till the disposal of this petition and a temporary injunction till the disposal of the main suit. 3. The petitioners filed their counter and opposed the petition. The trial Court after taking into consideration the case of the rival parties dismissed the petition. Aggrieved over the fair and final order of the trial Court, the petitioner preferred an appeal in C.M.A.No.8 of 2009 on the file of the Sub Court, Udhagamandalam. The Lower Appellate Court, while reversing the fair and final order of the trial Court, allowed the appeal and aggrieved over the same, the defendants have filed the above Civil Revision Petition. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners while making submissions, submitted that the defendants have also filed an application in I.A.No.450 of 2009 to refer the matter to arbitration, which was partly allowed by the trial Court. Aggrieved over the same, the plaintiff preferred the Civil Revision Petition in CRP.PD.No.2741 of 2009 before this Court and this Court, by an order dated 02.03.2011, allowed the Civil Revision Petition and referred the matter to Arbitrator. Since this Court in CRP PD.No.2741 of 2009 specifically found that the matter has to be referred to the Arbitrator nothing survives in the suit filed by the plaintiff. Therefore, the present Civil Revision Petition deserves no merit and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.