TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1992 (9) TMI 388
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant was discharged from services by respondent No. 1 vide Resolution dated 26th July, 1991. According to him the Resolution of the Board of Directors dated 26th July, 1991, which purports to have discharged the petitioner from service is contrary to law and without jurisdiction and that the meeting was not convened according to the law and that the Board of Directors were not even served. Therefore, the said Resolution dated 26th July, 1991, according to him is a nullity in the eyes of law. According to the appellant/ plaintiff another resolution dated 24th August, 1991 has been passed by Board of Directors nullifying the earlier resolution dated 26th July, 1991, and as such he is entitled to continue as Company Secretary. Under these c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that irreparable loss and injury would be caused to the plaintiff which cannot be compensated in terms of money in case the interim injunction is not granted. (5) In this case, we may notice that the order of discharge/termination of services has been implemented and that the plaintiff/appellant has been conveyed this order. In the face of this, whether the interim injunction can be granted or not by applying the above mentioned tests. . (6) Similar questions arose before a Full Bench of this Court in a case Sim Hari Krishan Shannav. Municipal Corporation of Delhi, decided on 14.8.1987, wherein it was held that no hard and fast rules can be laid down as to when stay should be granted or refused. However, it is well settled that the ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "THAT even if the plaintiff respondent had prima facie case there was no balance of convenience in his favor and if any injury was caused to him on account of the breach of contract of service he could be compensated by way of damages in terms of money Therefore he was not entitled to any injunction. The High Court failed to notice that even if a prima face case was made out, the balance of convenience and the irreparable injury were necessary to exist. The question whether the plaintiff could be compensated by way of damages in terms of money for the injury which may be caused to him on account of the breach of contract of service was no considered by the High Court. No temporary injunction should be issued unless the three essen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a long period of time. Damages equivalent to one or two months' wages would be poor consolation to him. They would be wholly insufficient to sustain him during the period of unemployment following upon his discharge. The provision for damages for wrongful termination of service was adequate at a time when an employee could without difficulty find other employment within the period of reasonable notice for which damages were given to him. But in conditions prevailing in Our country, damages are a poor substitute for reinstatement; they fall for short of the redress which the situation requires. To deny reinstatement to-an employee by refusing specific performance in such a case would be to throw him to the mercy of the employer; it would....