Interim injunction against the State requires Section 80 notice; jurisdictional objection to ex parte relief must be decided immediately.

An ex parte ad interim injunction against the State could not stand where the defendants objected that no notice had been served under Section 80(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Although a suit for injunction may in appropriate cases be filed against the State without prior notice under Section 80(1), that relaxation does not extend to interim relief without notice under Section 80(2). A jurisdictional objection to the injunction therefore required immediate consideration, and the trial court erred in postponing it on irrelevant grounds. The impugned order refusing to recall the injunction was set aside and the matter remitted for prompt fresh consideration.

---

---

Issues: Whether an ex parte ad interim order of injunction against the State could be recalled where the objection was that no notice had been served under Section 80(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and whether the trial court was justified in postponing consideration of that objection.

Analysis: A suit for injunction against the State may in appropriate cases be entertained without prior notice under Section 80(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, but the statutory relaxation does not extend to grant of interim relief or other relief without service of notice on the State or public officer under Section 80(2). The objection filed by the defendants raised a direct challenge to the validity of the ex parte injunction on the ground of lack of jurisdiction, and such a challenge required prompt judicial consideration. The reasons given by the trial court, including the pendency of other proceedings and the fact that the date fixed for objection had not yet arrived, were irrelevant to the immediate duty to examine whether the injunction order could stand.

Conclusion: The trial court ought to have considered the objection forthwith. The order declining to recall the ex parte injunction was unsustainable and was set aside, with a direction to dispose of the injunction matter in accordance with law.

Final Conclusion: The revision succeeded, the impugned order was vacated, and the injunction dispute was remitted for prompt fresh consideration on merits.

Ratio Decidendi: Where notice under Section 80(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is dispensed with for filing a suit against the State, no interim relief can be granted without notice under Section 80(2), and an objection alleging that an ex parte injunction is without jurisdiction must be considered immediately.

---