Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 198 (UTT)

William Dilawar v. Anil Kumar

2016-05-05

U.C.DHYANI

body2016
JUDGMENT : U.C. Dhyani, J. By means of present writ petition, the petitioners seek following reliefs, among others: “(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash order dated 02.05.2016, passed by Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Ramnagar (District Nainital) in Civil Suit no. 14 of 2016, William Dilawar and others vs. Bishop/Chairman and others to the extent he has refused to grant ex-parte injunction without hearing the defendants/respondents. (ii) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to restrain the defendants/respondents nos. 3 to 18 from casting vote or contesting elections in 9th Regular Session of the General Conference of the Methodist Church in India from 15 to 22 May, 2016 at Hyderabad during the pendency of the suit before the trial court.” 2. After arguing the writ petition at some length, learned counsel for the petitioners confined his prayer only to the extent that a direction be given to the Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Ramnagar to decide the temporary injunction application filed by the petitioners under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC, at an early date. 3. Drawing attention of the Court towards the fact that elections of the General Conference of the Methodist Church in India are going to commence from 15.05.2016 to 22.05.2016, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that inspite of pleadings to this effect before the court below, learned trial court has given a long date of 10.07.2016 and if the matter is heard so late, then the very purpose of filing the suit will be frustrated. A perusal of the impugned order will reveal that whereas the summons have been issued to the defendants directing them to file their written statements on 02.07.2016 and the date for settlement of issues has been fixed as 08.07.2016, it has been directed that the objections to the temporary injunction application shall also be filed on the said date. Even if the trial court was of the view that the temporary injunction application has to be decided only after issuing notices to the defendants, it ought to have listed the case at any date before 15.05.2016. This Court, therefore, is of the opinion that any date before 15.05.2016 ought to have been fixed by the trial court for disposal of temporary injunction application and objections thereon. 4. This Court, therefore, is of the opinion that any date before 15.05.2016 ought to have been fixed by the trial court for disposal of temporary injunction application and objections thereon. 4. This Court, while disposing of present writ petition does not feel it necessary to issue notices to the respondents keeping in view the innocuous prayer of learned counsel for the petitioners. 5. The writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself by directing the trial court to decide the temporary injunction application and objections thereon in the next week and, at any rate, on or before 13.05.2016 (14th and 15th May being second Saturday and Sunday). Learned counsel for the petitioners undertakes before this Court that the petitioners will get the respondents served either by special messenger or by dasti by 10.05.2016, after obtaining the notices from the trial court. 6. Let copy of the order be supplied to learned counsel for the petitioners today itself on payment of usual charges. 7. Stay application no. 4195 of 2016 also stands disposed of.