Temporary Injunction under CPC

This article is written by Kalyani Gupta, a Master’s in Law student from Amity University, Noida. This article discusses the temporary injunction mentioned under the Code of Civil Procedure.

INTRODUCTION

An “Injunction” is an impartial solution which is “a judicial process that compels a party to refrain from doing or to do a particular act or thing”. If any individual violates the Order of Injunction approved by the Competent Court, then there can be harsh financial punishments and even detention in some cases. The main objective of giving interim relief is the protection of property in disagreement till lawful rights and contradictory assertions of the parties prior to the court of law are resolved. Though, Injunction can also be altered or suspended if conditions shift in future. Section 94, 95 and Order 39 of the Civil Procedure Code exactly talks about Injunctions but, the temporary and permanent injunctions are well-defined under Section 36 to 42 of the “Specific Relief Act”.

Temporary Injunction

The “Temporary Injunction” is granted by the Court of Law when the Defendant is about to the do some kind of damage or injury to the property or threatens the Plaintiff to deprive the said property or makes a thirty party interest in that property, then in such conditions, the Court may grant a temporary injunction to confine the Defendant to do act or make other instructions to stop the dispossession of the plaintiff or avoid the instigating of injury to the plaintiff in relation to any property in argument or making any thirty party rights in the property.

Temporary injunction is an “interim remedy” that is raised up to preserve the subject matter in its current situation and which may be conferred on an “interlocutory application” at any stay of the suit. Its objective is to avoid the postponement of the plaintiff’s rights. Section 94 of the CPC requires the supplementary proceeding so that Plaintiff can avoid this right, whereas Section 94 (c) and (e) of Code of Civil Procedure, the Court may permit a temporary injunction or make such additional interlocutory orders. These are temporary injunction because its legality is, up until the additional order passed by the court or till the final decree of the court case.

Who may Apply for Temporary Injunction and against whom Injunction may be Issued?

  • Application for interim injunction along with affidavit can be made both by Plaintiff and Defendant. 
  • An Injunction can be made only against a party and not opposed to a stranger or third party. Additionally, the injunction cannot be made against the Court of Law or the Judicial Officers.

Basic Principles of Temporary Injunction

The granting of temporary injunction is the practice of the judgment which must be in a judicial manner. Consequently, it is well resolved that, prior to awarding the Temporary Injunction, the Judge must contemplate whether the Application is falling into below-mentioned classifications:

  1. Is it a Prima Facie case: In every single application, the Applicant or Plaintiff should make a prima facie argument in favour of the claimed right by the Plaintiff. The Court must be satisfied that there is a bona fide disagreement between both the parties in which the inquiry is needed. The Plaintiff must prove and appease the court by prominent evidence or witness and make a prima facie case in his favour. The plaintiff must come to Court with relevant facts and in case these facts are suppressed by the Plaintiff then, in this scenario, the Plaintiff is not accountable for any relief.

In Prakash Singh vs. State of Haryana, 2002 (4) Civil L.J.71 (P.H.) [5] – The Court has clarified that Prima Facie does not imply that a Plaintiff should have a complete proof argument in his favour which will prosper in all probabilities. It implies that the plaintiff has a case which cannot be denied swiftly or rejected outright. It presents concerns which can be deemed on merits.

  1. Is there any Irreparable Injury: The claimant must convince the court that he will endure severe injury if the injunction is not given. The Court is convinced that the Plaintiff needs to be safeguarded from the effects of apprehended damage. An injury will be regarded as severe in which there is no specific economic standard for assessing losses.

The term irreversible injury however does not imply that there would be no chance of fixing the injury. It only indicates that the damage must be a significant one. i.e., which cannot be sufficiently reimbursed by damages. An injury will be considered as irreversible where there is no specific monetary standard for assessing injuries.

The Supreme Court in Shanti Kumar Panda v. Shakuntala Devi, 03.11.2003[7], the court held that “At the stage of passing an interlocutory order such as on an application for the grant of ad interim injunction under Rule 1 or 2 of Order 39 of the CPC, the competent Court shall have to form its opinion on the availability of a prima facie case, the balance of convenience and the irreparable injury – the three pillars on which rests the foundation of any order of injunction”.

  1. Is there any Balance of Convenience: The Claimant must demonstrate in this application that the sense of balance of accessibility is in his favour i.e. the relative mischief, difficulty or hassle which is expected to be caused to the Applicant if that injunction is refused.  The balance of accessibility comes into the light when there is uncertainty as to the sufficient remedies in reparations offered to either party or both.
  1. Other factors: The Court also contemplates some other considerations before granting the injunction. The relief of injunction may be rejected on the basis of delay, or acquiescence or if the plaintiff has suppressed material facts or not, or where financial compensation is sufficient relief.

Grounds for Granting Temporary Injunctions from Court

  • Where there is a sufficient apprehension and threat of alienation or removal of property by any party to the suit or by unlawful misuse of the property.
  • Where there is an apprehension of estrangement or removal of the property to deceive creditors.
  • Where Defendant endangers to deprive the Plaintiff or else causes harm to the interest of the Plaintiff or otherwise causes damage to the interest of Plaintiff regarding the property in dispute. 
  • Where the Defendant is just about to perpetrate a breach of contract
  • Any other damage is expected to be instigated or likely to be recurrent
  • Where the Court is of the view that to safeguard the interest of any party, or in the interest of fairness and justice injunction or stay is essential and necessary.

CONCLUSION

It can be concluded that grant of temporary injunction cannot be demanded by the party as a question of right nor can be rejected by the Court subjectively. The injunction is an impartial remedy and draws the use of the maxim “he who seeks equity must do equity”. The Court has full responsibility to either grant an injunction or to reject it. The relief of injunction cannot be taken as an issue of right but according to the applicant’s case as may be. The authority to award an injunction must, consequently, be implemented with the best judgment, caution, and care.

Latest Posts


Archives

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *