https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199290 Interlocutory injunctions must satisfy the settled tests of a prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable injury, and a blanket restraint should not be maintained where it causes disproportionate hardship. The Court noted that the plaintiffs' entitlement and the disputed status of Nirmala remained issues for trial, and that rejection of an Order VII Rule 11 application did not determine interim relief. Finding that the lower courts had not properly weighed comparative prejudice, it narrowed the restraint and approved conditional safeguards such as disclosure to purchasers, deposit of sale proceeds and protection of commercial receipts pending trial. en-us Wed, 13 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Feb 2018 16:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199290 Interlocutory injunctions must satisfy the settled tests of a prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable injury, and a blanket restraint should not be maintained where it causes disproportionate hardship. The Court noted that the plaintiffs' entitlement and the disputed status of Nirmala remained issues for trial, and that rejection of an Order VII Rule 11 application did not determine interim relief. Finding that the lower courts had not properly weighed comparative prejudice, it narrowed the restraint and approved conditional safeguards such as disclosure to purchasers, deposit of sale proceeds and protection of commercial receipts pending trial. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 13 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199290