<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1991 (12) TMI 282 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184722</link>
    <description>Temporary injunction is a discretionary, preventive remedy meant to preserve the subject matter of the suit until rights are decided, and it depends on a prima facie case, irreparable injury, and balance of convenience. Where the applicant fails to establish these requirements, and compensation in damages would adequately protect the claimant if successful, ad interim relief should be refused. The existence of a court-executed sale deed in favour of the appellant, the respondent&#039;s conduct, repeated refusal of interim relief by the courts below, and the effect of lis pendens on any alienation were material considerations. On those facts, the injunction was held unjustified and the trial court&#039;s refusal of interim relief was restored.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Dec 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Jul 2016 17:12:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=435319" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (12) TMI 282 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184722</link>
      <description>Temporary injunction is a discretionary, preventive remedy meant to preserve the subject matter of the suit until rights are decided, and it depends on a prima facie case, irreparable injury, and balance of convenience. Where the applicant fails to establish these requirements, and compensation in damages would adequately protect the claimant if successful, ad interim relief should be refused. The existence of a court-executed sale deed in favour of the appellant, the respondent&#039;s conduct, repeated refusal of interim relief by the courts below, and the effect of lis pendens on any alienation were material considerations. On those facts, the injunction was held unjustified and the trial court&#039;s refusal of interim relief was restored.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Dec 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184722</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>