Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the ex parte interim injunction could be granted without prior notice and without recording reasons that delay would defeat the object of granting injunction.
Analysis: Interim injunctions are discretionary and are ordinarily granted after notice to the opposite party. The exception permitting dispensation with notice requires the court to record reasons showing that delay in issuing notice would defeat the object of the injunction. The existence of a prima facie case, balance of convenience, or apprehension of irreparable injury by itself does not dispense with the mandatory requirement under the proviso to Order 39, Rule 3. The order under challenge did not record the necessary reasons for bypassing notice, and the defendant had already commenced business by the time the suit was filed.
Conclusion: The ex parte injunction was unsustainable and was rightly set aside in favour of the appellant.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, the ex parte restraint order was vacated, and the temporary injunction application was left to be decided afresh on merits after hearing both sides.
Ratio Decidendi: An ex parte injunction under Order 39 can be granted without notice only if the court records reasons showing that delay in giving notice would defeat the object of the injunction; absence of such recorded reasons vitiates the order.