Madras High Court
K.Dhamodarasamy Naidu & Brothers vs M/S.Tiruppur Sree Annapporna on 7 June, 2023
CMA No.1158 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 07.06.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA , CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.1158 of 2023
1.K.Dhamodarasamy Naidu & Brothers,
A registered Partnership Firm,
rep. By its Power Agent,
Mr.Jegan S.Damodarasamy
2.Sree Annapoorna Sree Gowrishankar Hotels Pvt.Ltd.,
rep. By its Executive Director,
Mr.Jegan S.Damodarasamy ... Appellants
versus
1.M/s.Tiruppur Sree Annapporna,
A Partnership Firm, rep. By its Partner,
Mr.Venkatesh Dheenadayalan and
Mrs.Vasanthi Dheenadayalan
2.Venkatesh Dheenadayalan
Partner, M/s.Tiruppur Sree Annapporna
3.Vasanthi Dheenadayalan
Partner, M/s.Tiruppur Sree Annapporna ... Respondents
Prayer: Appeal filed against the order dated 27.02.2023 in IA No.5 of 2023 in
O.S.No.231 of 2018 by the Principal District Judge, Coimbatore.
For the Appellants :: Mr.R.Udhaya Kumar
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.1158 of 2023
JUDGMENT
(Made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)
Heard Mr.R.Udhaya Kumar, learned counsel for the appellants.
2. The appellants assail the order dated 27.02.2023 in IA No.5 of 2023 in
OS No.231 of 2018, whereby the application filed by the appellants for
mandatory injunction was rejected.
3. On a perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the learned
Trial Judge while rejecting the application has not traversed the pleadings of
the parties on merits. The learned Trial Judge has observed that the
application is filed by the appellants for violation of the status quo order
passed by this Court and the same is pending enquiry. The High Court, in an
appeal, has directed the parties to co-operate for completion of the trial of
the suit. In view of that, the Trial Court has observed that it is not inclined to
order any further interim orders in the suit.
4. Learned Counsel for the Appellants submit that during the
enforcement of the status quo order, the respondents/defendants had opened
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.1158 of 2023
another shop and were trying to use the trademark of the present appellants.
The subsequent fact necessitated the appellants to file an application for
mandatory injunction and also an application for violation of the order of
status quo. Though the application for violation of the order of status quo is
pending consideration by the Trial Court, there is no impediment for the Trial
Court to consider the present application for mandatory injunction on merits.
It is the further contention of the learned counsel that appellants/plaintiffs
have already let in evidence and also cross-examined witnesses. Now, the
matter is posted for marking the documents and the evidence of the
respondents/defendants. The respondents/defendants are prolonging the
matter. The learned trial Judge is seeking extension of time from this Court for
disposal of the suit.
5. It transpires that the learned trial Judge, while disposing of the
application, has not decided the same on merits. There was an earlier round of
proceedings being filed before this Court. The present respondents had filed
CMA No.3286 of 2019 against the order of injunction granted by the Trial Court.
In the said matter, this Court had directed the Principal District Judge,
Coimbatore, to try the suit and dispose of the same within a period of six
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.1158 of 2023
months and directed the parties to maintain status quo. The said order was
passed on 20.11.2019. More than 3½ years have lapsed after the order is
passed by this Court. It is expedient that the Trial Court decides the suit
expeditiously, considering the directions given by this Court, way back on
20.11.2019 in CMA No.3286 of 2019.
6. In light of the above, we expect that the Trial Court makes an
endeavour to decide the suit itself as expeditiously as possible and preferably
within a period of three months. That would serve the ends of justice. As the
learned trial Judge has not discussed the merits of the matter while rejecting
the application of the appellants while passing the impugned order, we have
also not considered the same on merits.
7. With the aforesaid observation, the appeal is disposed of. There will
be no order as to costs.
(S.V.G., CJ.) (P.D.A., J.)
07.06.2023
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
tar
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.1158 of 2023
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
P.D.AUDIKESAVALU, J.
(tar)
C.M.A.No.1158 of 2023
07.06.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
