THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY
WRIT APPEAL No.608 of 2019
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)
The present writ appeal is arising out of the order
dated 10.06.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in
W.P.No.11086 of 2019.
The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the
appellant before this Court has preferred a suit i.e.,
O.S.No.545 of 2014 in the Court of VII Additional Senior
Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, against
the same respondents, who were the respondents No.2
and 3 in the writ petition as well as the writ appeal, praying for grant of perpetual injunction against the defendants therein and the suit was decreed on 28.09.2015. It was alleged before the learned Single Judge that in spite of the judgment and decree granted by the Court, the respondents are interfering with the peaceful possession. The learned Single Judge, in the light of the civil suit which was decided between the same parties, has disposed of the writ petition holding that there cannot be any multiplicity of litigation and in case the writ petitioner is having grievance in respect of 2 violation of decree granted in her favour, she has to work out her remedies as available in law.
Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn the attention of this Court to towards the judgment delivered in the case of Gulabchand Chhotalal Parikh v. State of Bombay (Now Gujarat)1.
In the aforesaid case, the appellant prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus and a writ of prohibition against the respondent/State in a writ petition filed in the High Court on the ground that his liability as surety for some contractors stood discharged on account of a particular action of the State. The High Court dismissed the writ petition on merits after full contest. He thereupon filed a suit against the respondent and raised the same plea that he was discharged from liability as surety on the same grounds. The trial Court, the first appellate Court and the High Court held that the suit was barred by res judicata in view of the judgment of the High Court in the writ petition. In those circumstances, it was held that the decision given by the High Court in the writ petition would not preclude the Court before which the suit was filed from deciding the same question on merits in the civil suit.
1 AIR 1965 SC 1153 3 The Code of Civil Procedure provides for a remedy in case the judgment and decree are violated and therefore, as there is a remedy certainly available under the Code of Civil Procedure, the learned Single Judge was justified in dismissing the writ petition. The judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant does not help the appellant at all.
Resultantly, the admission is declined and the writ appeal is dismissed with a liberty to the appellant to avail the remedies available under the Code of Civil Procedure.
The miscellaneous applications pending in this writ appeal, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
___________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ ___________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J 24.11.2021 vs