Sardar Navpreet Singh and ors. Vs.

[k.t. thomas and; r.p. sethi, jj.] - civil procedure code (cpc) - sections 104 - order 39, rules 1, 2, 2a, 3a, 4 and 10 - order 43, rule 1; constitution of india - article 227 - orders from which appeal lies -- when a plaintiff rushed to the civil court for an ex-parte interimorder of injunction against some of the defendants and obtained it, those defendants rushed to the high court to get that order quashed. appellant-plaintiff filed the suit on 25.6.1999 for a decree of permanent injunction restraining defendant nos.1 to 5 from dispossessing him. documents perused. ad interim injunction till then. order 39 rule 3 to be complied with. after holding thus learned single judge directed the trial court to take up the interlocutory application for injunction and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law expeditiously. order 43 rule 1 says that: an appeal shall lie from the following orders under the provisions of section 104 namely. an order under rule 1, rule 2, rule 2a, rule 4 or rule 10 of order 39. the choice is for the party affected by the order either to move the appellate court or to approach the same court which passed the ex parte order for any relief. learned senior counsel for the respondents then contended that an order granting injunction without complying with the requisites envisaged in rule 3 of order 39 be void. learned single judge stated that the trial court ought not to have granted ex parte injunction beyond thirty days to be in force. the aforesaid rule casts a three-pronged protection to the party against whom the ex parte injunction order was passed. second is the legal obligation that if for any valid reasons the court could not finally dispose of the application within the aforesaid time the court has to record the reasons thereof in writing......submission of the charge-sheet, has become in fructuous. it is being again pressed for referring the matter to the mediation centre. 2. the petitioners (sardar navpreet singh, smt. acharaj kaur, sasrdar amarjeet singh, parmindar singh @ rikki, daljeet singh @ sanni & smt. jasvindar kaur @ bholi) have filed this petition under section 482 of the code of criminal procedure for quashing the proceedings of case no. 7044 of 2010 (state vs. sardar navpreet singh & others) under sections 498-a, 323, 324, 504 and 506 ipc and 3/4 of the dowry prohibition act, police station chakeri, district kanpur nagr, pending in the court of chief metorpolitan magistrate kanpur nagar. 3. the dispute is between the husband and wife. considering the circumstance that relationship between husband and wife may not further undergo any bitterness, the matter may be considered for settlement by process of mediation. 4. the counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners are ready for settling the dispute by mediation and are willing to deposit a sum of rs. 8000/- (rs. eight thousand only) towards maintenances and expenses of the wife (victim) for appearing before the mediation centre. 5. notice on behalf of the state of u.p. and state officials has been accepted by the aga. issue notice to respondent no. 2 by registered post. list for admission after service upon the private respondent. 6. in the meantime, no coercive process shall be issued and executed against the petitioners. 7. the question of referring the case to the mediation centre will be considered after service upon the private respondent. it is made clear that in case the private respondent agrees for referring the case to the mediation centre then it will be referred to the mediation centre and the stay order will be further continued only if the petitioners deposit the bank draft at least of the aforesaid amount in favour of the wife (victim).