IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION No 422 of 1992 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE N.N.MATHUR ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? -------------------------------------------------------------- UNION OF INDIA Versus GAJENDRA P JOSHI -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR BB NAIK for Petitioner MR SHIRISH JOSHI for Respondent No. 1 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE N.N.MATHUR Date of decision: 02/02/98 ORAL JUDGEMENT This Civil Revision Application under Section 115 of C.P.C. is filed by Union of India through the Accounts Officer, Telecom Department, Rajkot. The necessary facts of the case are that the plaintiff filed a suit in the court of Civil Judge (S.D.), Rajkot, with respect of excessive billing of telephone bill for Rs. 19,844/-. Along with suit an application for interim injunction Exh. 5 was also filed. The trial court after hearing the parties by order dated 12.8.1991 granted interim injunction on depositing a sum of Rs. 10,000/- and furnishing a bank security for rest of Rs. 10,000/- of the bill. While granting the interim injunction the court found that it was not the case that the telephone holder was making a wrong complaint of excessive billing. The learned judge considering the average use of telephone holder considered appropriate to grant interim injunction by putting conditions of payment of half of the amount in cash and bank security for the rest of the amount. The petitioner preferred appeal against the said order which has been dismissed by the order of the Second Joint District Judge, Rajkot dated 4.3.1992. I have gone through the memorandum of revision application. It is contended that the provisions of Section 7B of the Indian Telegraphs Act provides for referring the dispute to the Arbitrator and therefore the Civil Court has no jurisdiction. This question can be gone into during the trial of the case. In my view, the matter calls for no interference by this court in exercise of power under Section 115 of C.P.C. The revision application is rejected. Rule is discharged. The interim order granted by this court dated 26.3.1992 that the telephone connection shall be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties and the amount deposited by the respondents shall be returned to the plaintiff shall continue till disposal of the main suit. 00000 pkn.