TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Restraint on termination of employment: injunction denied as monetary damages adequate; prior injunction set aside on appeal</h1> Whether a temporary injunction should restrain termination of employment: SC reaffirmed the tripartite test for interlocutory injunctions-prima facie ... - Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in setting aside the District Judge's order and restoring the Trial Court's grant of temporary injunction restraining the appellant society from terminating the respondent's employment.Analysis: The Court examined the established requirements for granting a temporary injunction (i) existence of a prima facie case, (ii) balance of convenience in favour of the applicant, and (iii) likelihood of irreparable injury not compensable by money. The District Judge found absence of a prima facie case and, in any event, held that even if a prima facie case existed there was no balance of convenience because any injury from breach of the contract of service could be compensated by damages. The High Court interfered by restoring the Trial Court's injunction without addressing the District Judge's specific finding that damages would be an adequate remedy. The Supreme Court held that the High Court overlooked that absence of any one of the three essential ingredients disentitles the applicant to injunction and that the question whether damages are an adequate remedy must be considered before granting interlocutory relief.Conclusion: The appeal is allowed; the High Court's order is set aside, the District Judge's order dated 5th October, 1987 is restored and the respondent's application for temporary injunction is dismissed (in favour of Appellant).
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
