Temporary injunction in money suits can restrain asset transfers where prima facie fraud and dissipation risk are shown.

In a money suit alleging fraud and collusion, a temporary injunction may be justified where pleadings, correspondence and forensic material establish a prima facie case and a real apprehension that defendants may dissipate assets to defeat recovery. The discussion explains that Order 39 Rule 1(b) CPC applies when a defendant threatens to dispose of property with intent to defraud creditors, and that the court may restrain transfer or alienation even in a monetary claim if the balance of convenience favours protection. Objections based on delay, disputed facts and inherent powers were treated as unpersuasive on the stated facts, with security directed to protect the claim.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in a money suit founded on alleged fraud and collusion, the Court could grant ad interim injunction restraining the defendants from transferring or alienating their properties and require security to protect the plaintiff's claim.

Analysis: The pleadings, emails exchanged between the employee and the distributors, the admissions recorded in correspondence and meetings, and the forensic audit reports were treated as strong prima facie material showing that excess credit notes had been fraudulently passed and that the plaintiff faced a real apprehension that the defendants might defeat recovery by dealing with their assets. The Court held that Order 39 Rule 1(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is attracted where a defendant threatens or intends to dispose of property with a view to defrauding creditors, and that, even in a money claim, the Court may grant temporary restraint where the plaintiff has shown a prima facie case of fraud and the balance of convenience supports protection of the claim. The objections based on delay, disputed facts, and the limits of inherent power were rejected on the facts, and the Court found that the suit was instituted after investigation and quantification of the claim.

Conclusion: The plaintiff was entitled to ad interim protection, and the defendants were restrained from transferring or alienating the specified properties and assets, with the claims to be secured up to the amounts fixed by the Court.

Ratio Decidendi: In a money suit, where prima facie fraud and collusion are established and there is a real apprehension of dissipation of assets to defeat recovery, a temporary injunction may be granted under Order 39 Rule 1(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to restrain alienation and secure the plaintiff's claim.

---