https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166946 A final mandatory injunction cannot be impeached or modified merely on asserted changed circumstances unless the legal basis of the decree has materially changed. The plaint challenging the earlier decree was also liable to rejection because it disclosed no legally cognisable cause of action under Article 131 and was barred by res judicata, including the effect of an earlier unconditional withdrawal. The challenge to the water dispute provision failed on similar threshold grounds, with the pleadings not showing prima facie constitutional invalidity. A final decree remains binding despite later litigation, and the Court may direct practical modes of implementation, including completion of the canal through a central agency. en-us Fri, 04 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Nov 2014 10:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166946 A final mandatory injunction cannot be impeached or modified merely on asserted changed circumstances unless the legal basis of the decree has materially changed. The plaint challenging the earlier decree was also liable to rejection because it disclosed no legally cognisable cause of action under Article 131 and was barred by res judicata, including the effect of an earlier unconditional withdrawal. The challenge to the water dispute provision failed on similar threshold grounds, with the pleadings not showing prima facie constitutional invalidity. A final decree remains binding despite later litigation, and the Court may direct practical modes of implementation, including completion of the canal through a central agency. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 04 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166946