AIR 1969 RAJASTHAN 302

Rajasthan High Court

Hon'ble Judge(s): C. M. Lodha , J

Civil P.C. (5 of 1908) , S.115, O.32 R.7, O.39 R.1, O.39 R.2— Compromise decree under O.32, R.7 - Suit by minor to set aside decree and grant of permanent injunction - Application also for issuance of temporary injunction under O.39, Rr.1 and 2 - Application dismissed on the ground that no prima facie case was made out - Revision - Plaint in suit merely alleging non-compliance with O.32, R.7 - Held, revision was not maintainable as no question of jurisdiction was involved. It is well settled that the powers of High Courts under Section 115 are limited to see whether in a case decided, there has been an assumption of jurisdiction where none existed or a refusal of jurisdiction where it did, or there has been material irregularity or illegality in the exercise of that jurisdiction.(Para 4) In a suit by a minor to set aside a compromise decree under Order 32, Rule 7 and for issuance of a permanent injunction, the plaintiff also applied for the grant of temporary injunction under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2. The application for temporary injunction was dismissed and the ex parte injunction granted was vacated on the ground that the plaintiff had failed to show a prima facie case in his favour. In revision. Held, a minor to avoid a decree on the ground of non-compliance with Order 32, Rule 7 must show that the compromise ....