https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272471 An injunction restraining execution of a lawfully obtained decree was not available under Order XXXIX Rules 1 or 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, because those provisions address threatened waste, damage, alienation, or cognisable injury, not execution of a decree itself. Section 94 did not enlarge that power beyond the Rules framed under the Code. Section 151 could not be used to grant the same relief where the Code already provided a specific and intendedly exhaustive procedural scheme. The result was that the Code did not authorise an injunction against execution of the decree in the stated circumstances. en-us Fri, 02 Oct 1925 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 May 2018 14:48:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272471 An injunction restraining execution of a lawfully obtained decree was not available under Order XXXIX Rules 1 or 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, because those provisions address threatened waste, damage, alienation, or cognisable injury, not execution of a decree itself. Section 94 did not enlarge that power beyond the Rules framed under the Code. Section 151 could not be used to grant the same relief where the Code already provided a specific and intendedly exhaustive procedural scheme. The result was that the Code did not authorise an injunction against execution of the decree in the stated circumstances. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 02 Oct 1925 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272471