Madras High CourtCMA/2774/2017dismissed

Anumamma v. M/S. Micro Labs Ltd.,

2017-10-04Honourable Mr Justice M.Duraiswamy5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 04.10.2017

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY C.M.A.No.2774 of 2017 and C.M.P.No.15828 of 2017 1.Anumamma 2.A.Anusuyabai 3.S.Aruna 4.A.Bargatnisha 5.G.Bharathi 6.S.Dhanalakshmi 7.S.Eswar 8.V.Indrani 9.S.Jayamma 10.V.Kala 11.N.Kamala 12.C.Kavitha 13.M.Lakshmi 14.C.Lingappa 15.S.M.Manjula 16.N.Mary 17.A.Moidunisha 18.P.Nagubai 19.C.Neela 20.T.Palaniammal 21.M.Panneerselvam 22.M.Parthiban 23.A.Poongodi 24.R.Prakash 25.M.Radha 26.R.Radhamani 27.A.Rama 28.V.Rani 29.A.Regina 30.B.Renuka 31.G.Savithri 32.B.Savithri 33.P.Selvi 34.S.Selvi 35.B.Shivaprakash 36.C.Sulochana 37.N.Sundaravalli 38.P.Suriyakanth 39.D.Sweety

40.S.Usha 41.C.Vasanthi 42.K.Vasuki 43.V.Vennila 44.R.Vijaya 45.P.Yasodha 46.V.Gajalakshmi 47.N.Kuppamma 48.M.Nagaswamy 49.N.Narasamma 50.Nirmala Mary 51.M.Yellamma 52.K.Amaresh 53.M.Chandrappa 54.Chennabasappa 55.T.Dhanabagyam 56.G.Gandhi 57.S.Geetha 58.D.Girija 59.R.Govindammal 60.C.Jamuna 61.U.Jayalakshmi 62.K.Jayanthi 63.K.Kalaiselvi 64.D.Kalpana 65.R.Kavitha 66.S.Kavitha 67.S.K.Kavitha 68.Kishan Bahadur 69.M.Kokila 70.V.Kokila 71.R.Komaleswari 72.P.Senthil 73.M.Lakshmi 74.S.Magi 75.K.Manjula 76.V.Manjula 77.A.Sivagami 78.M.Muninanjappa 79.S.Murugan 80.N.Narasimha Murthy 81.G.Padma 82.P.Prabhavathi 83.K.Prameela 84.S.Punitha 85.S.Rajeswari 86.N.Ramadevi 87.K.Rani 88.R.Rathna 89.R.Ravi 90.E.S.Ragina

91.S.Renuka 92.M.Sashidhar 93.K.Selvi 94.R.Shakthi 95.N.Sakunthala 96.P.Shrankumar Briadar 97.M.Sidramappa 98.M.Sudha 99.J.Usha 100.M.Vanitha 101.A.Vasantha 102.M.Vasanthi 103.R.Venu 104.T.Vijaya 105.Y.Yugiya 106.P.Visalakshi 107.L.Yasodha 108.M.Gowramma 109.A.Latha 110.P.Manjula 111.P.Muniammal 112.G.Pradeep 113.M.Rathnamma 114.R.Sangeetha 115.B.Santosh 116.M.Savithri 117.K.Shoba 118.R.Sunanda 119.S.Tamilselvi ... Appellants Vs.

M/s.Micro Labs Limited, rep by its Authorized Signatory, Plot No.92, SIPCOT Industrial Complex, Hosur.

.. Respondent Appeal filed Order 43 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code against the petition and order in ex-parte ad interim injunction granted by Sub Court, Hosur in I.A.No.494 of 2017 in O.S.No.259 of 2017 on 10.08.2017.

For Appellants : Mr.K.Sudakaikannu for M/s.S.Latha

JUDGMENT

Challenging the interim injunction granted by the Subordinate Judge, Hosur in I.A.No.494 of 2017 in O.S.No.259 of 2017, the defendants have filed the above Appeal. 2.The respondent/plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.259 of 2017 for declaration and permanent injunction. In the said suit,

the plaintiff also filed an application in I.A.No.494 of 2017 praying for interim injunction. The trial Court, by order dated 10.08.2017, granted an order of interim injunction till 30.08.2017 and directed the plaintiff to take notice to the defendants. Against this order, the defendants have filed the Appeal.

3.Though the application in I.A.No.494 of 2017 has not yet been decided finally by the trial Court, the defendants have filed the appeal under Order 43 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code.

4.Under Order 43 Rule 1(r) of the Civil Procedure Code, only if an application filed under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 of the Civil Procedure Code is decided finally, an appeal is maintainable. Since the trial Court has not decided the application finally, the Appeal preferred by the defendants cannot be entertained.

5.The learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that the defendants have filed their counter and the application is posted for enquiry on 10.10.2017. Further, the learned counsel submitted that in view of the interim injunction granted by the trial Court, the defendants are put to hardship and prejudice.

6.In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants, without expressing any opinion with regard to the merits of the case, I direct the Subordinate Judge, Hosur to decide the application in I.A.No.494 of 2017 in O.S.No.259 of 2017 on merits and in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7.With this observation, the Appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. sd/ ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /TRUE COPY/ SUB-ASSISTANT REGISTRAR va To 1.The Subordinate Judge, Hosur.

2. The Section Officer VR Section, High Court, Madras.

+1 CC to Mr.SUDALAIKANNU, Advocate Sr.No.71615 C.M.A.No.2774 of 2017 and C.M.P.No.15828 of 2017 MG (CO) NR 22/11/2017