Temporary injunction requires prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable injury; appellate interference is limited to perversity.

Temporary injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC is an equitable and discretionary remedy, and appellate interference is justified only when the trial court's discretion is arbitrary, capricious, perverse, or contrary to settled principles. Grant of interim relief depends on a strong prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury. On the stated materials, possession of the suit land remained with the respondent, the revenue entries were not clear enough to warrant interim protection, and the trial court had applied the accepted tests correctly. The refusal of temporary injunction was therefore upheld and no interference was made.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate court should interfere with the order refusing temporary injunction under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Analysis: Temporary injunction is an equitable and discretionary relief. Interference in appeal is warranted only where the trial court's discretion is shown to be arbitrary, capricious, perverse, or based on disregard of settled principles. Grant of such relief requires a strong prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury in favour of the applicant. On the materials placed, possession of the suit land was with the respondent, the disputed revenue entries were not clear enough to justify interim protection, and the trial court had applied the accepted principles while refusing injunction. No infirmity was shown in the exercise of discretion.

Conclusion: The refusal of temporary injunction was upheld and interference was declined.

---