Interim injunction scrutiny: non-consideration of defence and rival submissions led to remand for fresh adjudication.

The Delhi HC held that an interim injunction could not stand where the trial court had not considered the appellants' reply and written submissions already on record. As the order reflected only the plaintiff's case and did not engage with the rival stand on cargo release, lien, charges and carriage terms, the appellate court declined to decide the merits itself. It set aside the interim order in effect and remanded the interim application for fresh consideration by the trial court after hearing both sides and passing a detailed, reasoned order.

---

---

Issues: Whether the interim injunction order deserved to be set aside and the application remanded for fresh consideration after taking into account the defence and written submissions of the appellants.

Analysis: The appellate court found that the trial court had passed the interim order without dealing with the appellants' reply and written submissions, though those materials were already on record. The impugned order recorded only the plaintiff's case and did not reflect consideration of the rival stand, even though the dispute involved contested questions relating to the release of cargo, lien, charges, and the terms of carriage. In these circumstances, the appellate court declined to enter findings on merits and considered it appropriate that the interim application be reconsidered afresh by the trial court after hearing both sides and passing a detailed, reasoned order.

Conclusion: The interim order was set aside in effect and the matter was remanded to the trial court for fresh adjudication of the interim application after considering the pleadings, documents, and rival submissions.

---