Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →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 grant of ad interim injunction restraining dispossession was justified on the facts of the case.
Analysis: Temporary injunction is a discretionary, preventive relief intended to preserve the subject-matter of the suit till rights are adjudicated. Its grant depends on the existence of a prima facie case, likelihood of irreparable injury if relief is refused, and a balance of convenience in favour of preservation of status quo. The respondent's conduct, the existence of a court-executed sale deed in favour of the appellant, the availability of compensation in damages if the respondent ultimately succeeded, and the repeated refusal of interim relief by the courts below were material circumstances. Alienation, if any, would in any event be subject to lis pendens.
Conclusion: The grant of injunction was not justified; the trial court's refusal of interim relief was restored.
Ratio Decidendi: Ad interim injunction should be refused where the applicant fails to establish a real prima facie case, irreparable injury, and balance of convenience, and where adequate compensation can protect the applicant if the suit succeeds.