This review application has been brought forth by the appellant, who was the defendant in O.S.No.831/98 on the file of the District Munsif, Salem.
2.Agreeing with the case of the defendant, the suit was dismissed. Aggrieved, the plaintiff took it on appeal in A.S.No.45 of 2004 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Salem, whereby the judgment of the trial Court was reversed, and the suit was decreed. Aggrieved, the defendant took it on appeal in S.A.No.1053 of 2006. The Court after hearing both the parties and looking into the materials available, while answering the substantial questions of law, restored the judgment of the trial Court setting aside the judgment of the first appellate Court. Now, this review application has been brought forth.
3.It is represented by the learned Counsel for the review petitioner that the suit was filed seeking two reliefs one in respect of the pathway and the other in respect of the well; that the Court while considering the contentions put forth and also after looking into the materials, has held that the plaintiff can ask necessary relief by separate proceedings; that in the instant case while a specific relief has been asked for and sufficient materials are also available, it is a case where it should have also been considered, and hence it is a fit case where the earlier order has got to be reviewed.
4.The Court heard the learned Counsel for the respondent namely the appellant/defendant.
5.After hearing the learned Counsel on either side and looking into the judgment in respect of which review is sought for, this Court is of the considered opinion that the application does not carry any merit whatsoever. It is true that the plaintiff has sought for reliefs in respect of the pathway and also the well. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court. Aggrieved, the plaintiff took it on appeal, and the judgment of the trial Court was reversed. Under the circumstances, the defendant took it on appeal. This Court has considered the same and has also taken a view that it is a case where no question of grant of permanent injunction would arise since there was no cause of action available for the plaintiff when he filed the suit. In such circumstances, the contentions now put forth by the learned Counsel for the review petitioner do not arise for consideration at all. This Court is of the opinion that this review application does not carry any merit, and accordingly, it is dismissed. No costs.
nsv To:
1.The Principal Subordinate Judge Salem
2.The District Munsif Salem