Article 227 supervisory review cannot replace statutory remedies against an interlocutory injunction order under the Civil Procedure Code.
Where an interlocutory injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code is challenged, the High Court should not ordinarily invoke Article 227 to reappreciate disputed facts or substitute supervisory review for the statutory remedies available. The Court noted that an application under Order XXXIX Rule 4 and an appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) remained available, and that the controversy involved mixed questions of fact and law requiring evidence. The civil revision was therefore not maintainable for interference at that stage, and the injunction order was left undisturbed, with liberty reserved to pursue the appropriate remedies before the trial court and in appeal.
Issues: Whether the civil revision under Article 227 was maintainable against the ad interim injunction order, and whether interference was warranted when statutory remedies under the Civil Procedure Code were available.
Analysis: The dispute concerned an interim injunction granted under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. The order was criticised as unreasoned and as having been passed without prompt disposal as contemplated by Order XXXIX Rule 3A, but the Court held that the controversy raised mixed questions of fact and law requiring evidence. It further held that the petitioners had concurrent statutory remedies, namely an application under Order XXXIX Rule 4 and an appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1(r), and that supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 is to be exercised sparingly and not as a substitute for appellate correction.
Conclusion: The civil revision was not maintainable as a ground for interference at this stage, and the petitioners were left to pursue their remedies before the trial court and by appeal in accordance with law.
Final Conclusion: The impugned injunction order was not disturbed, and the revision petition was dismissed while reserving liberty to agitate all factual and legal contentions before the appropriate forum.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an interlocutory injunction order is challengeable through statutory remedies under the Civil Procedure Code, the High Court should not ordinarily invoke Article 227 to reappreciate disputed facts or substitute supervisory review for the ordinary appellate and procedural remedies.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
