Interim mandatory injunction requires a strong case, irreparable injury and balance of convenience; disputed contractual rights go to trial.

Interim mandatory injunction is a discretionary remedy that requires a strong prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury; it is generally confined to preserving or restoring the last non-contested status. In a commercial contract dispute, questions about termination, breach, and possession should ordinarily be left for trial rather than resolved finally at the interlocutory stage. The High Court was said to have treated disputed issues as if deciding the suit and did not adequately address the trial court's findings or any clear irreparable injury, so its interim mandatory injunction and restoration of possession were set aside and the refusal of interim relief was restored.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in granting interim mandatory injunction and restoration of possession in an interlocutory proceeding, and whether the settled tests for interim relief were properly applied.

Analysis: Interim injunction is a discretionary remedy and ordinarily depends on the existence of a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury. A mandatory interlocutory injunction stands on a higher footing and is generally granted only to preserve or restore the last non-contested status, or where serious injury would otherwise result. In a dispute arising from a commercial contract, the validity of termination and the effect of an alleged breach are matters for trial and are not to be finally determined at the interlocutory stage. The High Court had treated disputed questions of possession and contractual validity as though it were deciding the suit, without adequately addressing the trial court's findings or the absence of a clear case of irreparable injury.

Conclusion: The grant of interim mandatory injunction by the High Court was unjustified and unsustainable; the appellant succeeded.

Final Conclusion: The order of the High Court was set aside and the trial court's refusal of interim relief was restored.

Ratio Decidendi: Interlocutory mandatory injunction should not be granted unless the applicant shows a strong case, irreparable injury, and a balance of convenience in its favour, and disputed contractual rights should ordinarily be left for trial.

---