Principles of Injunction

Posted On : April 18, 2017
Listen to this article

Table of Contents

The injunction is an equitable remedy in the form of a court order that requires a party to do or refrain from doing specific acts. A party that fails to comply with an injunction faces criminal or civil penalties and may have to pay damages or accept sanctions. In some cases, breaches of injunctions are considered serious criminal offenses that merit arrest and possible prison sentences. Injunctions are preventive, prohibitive or restrictive i.e. when they prevent, prohibit or restrain someone from doing something or mandatory, i.e. when they compel, command or orders some persons to do something. It is not the plaintiff alone who can apply for Interim Injunction. A defendant can also make an application for grant of an injunction against the plaintiff. An injunction may be issued only against a party and not against a stranger or 3rd party. In our country, the Specific Relief Act, 1963 provides a large number of remedial aspects of Law. This Act came into force in the replacement of earlier Act of 1877. The injunction is a judicial process by which one who has invaded or is threatening to invade the rights, legal or equitable, of another, is ordered to refrain from doing or to do a particular act or thing. Types of Injunction: Injunctions are of two types, (1) “Temporary” and (2) “Permanent”. A Permanent Injunction restrains a party for ever from doing the specified act and the same can be granted only on merits at the conclusion of the trial after hearing both the parties to the suit. It is governed by Sections 38 to 42 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. A temporary or interim injunction, on the other hand, restrains a party temporarily from doing the specified act and can be granted until the disposal of the suit. It is regulated by the provisions of Order 39 of the CPC and it may be granted at any stage of the suit. Important issues taken into account by the court while granting an injunction are wasting, damaging, alienation or sale or removal or disposition of the property or disposition of plaintiff or otherwise injury to the plaintiff in relation to any property in dispute in the suit, where it is provided by affidavit or otherwise-
  •  that property in dispute in a suit is in danger or being wasted, damaged or alienated by any party to the suit or wrongfully sold on the execution of a decree or;
  •  that the defendant threatens or intend to remove or dispose of his property with a view to defrauding his creditor or;
  • that the defendant threatens to dispose the plaintiff or otherwise cause injury to the plaintiff in relation to any property in dispute in the suit.
It would be necessary for the plaintiff to satisfy the court that substantial and irreparable harm or injury would be suffered by him if such temporary injunction is not granted and such loss or damage or harm cannot be compensated by damages. Interlocutory order (Power to order Interim sale) is granted if the immovable property which is subject to speedy and natural decay or which for any other sufficient cause it may be desirable to be sold at once. The court may on the application of the applicant of any party to a suit order the sale of such detained goods.   In Colgate-Palmolive (India) Ltd. Vs. Hindustan Lever Ltd., AIR 1999 SC 3105, the apex court observed that the other considerations which ought to weigh with the Court hearing the application or petition for the grant of injunctions are as below:
  1.       The extent of damages being an adequate remedy.
  2.       Protect the plaintiff’s interest in violation of his rights though however having regard to the injury that may be suffered by the defendants by reason, therefore.
  3.     The court while dealing with the matter ought not to ignore the factum of strength of one party’s case being stronger than the others;
  4.   No fixed rules or notions ought to be had in the matter of grant of the injunction but on the facts and circumstances of each case- the relief being kept flexible.
  5.   The issue is to be looked from the point of view as to whether on refusal of the injunction the plaintiff would suffer irreparable loss and injury keeping in view the strength of the parties’ case;
  6.  The balance of convenience or inconvenience ought to be considered as an important requirement even if there is a serious question or prima facie case in support of the grant.
  7. Whether the grant or refusal of the injunction will adversely affect the interest of general public which can or cannot be compensated otherwise.
To sum up, succinctly, injunction means ‘It is an order of Court by which an individual is required to perform, or is restrained from performing, a particular act. It is a judicial process. The courts exercise their power to issue injunctions judiciously, and only when necessity exists. An injunction is generally issued only in cases where irreparable injury to the rights of an individual would result otherwise. It should be readily apparent to the court that some act has been performed, or is threatened, that will produce irreparable injury to the party seeking the injunction. An injury is generally considered irreparable when it cannot be adequately compensated by an award of damages. The pecuniary damage that would be incurred from the threatened action need not be great, however. If a loss can be calculated in terms of money, there is no irreparable injury. The consequent refusal by a court to grant an injunction is, therefore, proper. Loss of profits alone is insufficient to establish irreparable injury. The potential destruction of property is sufficient. Injunctive relief is not a matter of right, but its denial is within the discretion of the court. Whether or not an injunction will be granted varies with the facts of each case.
Written By:
sneha majumder

sneha majumder

Recommended Free Legal Advices
question markTitle Suit 1 Response(s)
In case of willful disobedience of the injunction Order by the Defendant, it is necessary on your part to file application under Order39 Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure as amended up to date praying before the Ld. Court for an Order that the property of the defendant who is guilty of such disobedience or breach is to be attached, and also for order that the defendant be detained in the civil prison for a term not exceeding 3 Months. If your lawyer is not taking any action,then you can ask him to give NOC so that you can engage new lawyer after signing fresh Vakalatnama.
question markEncroachment and trespassing 2 Response(s)
File criminal case against them or demand for ur huge loose . Otherwise create dispute in his property
question markPermanent Injunction Query 2 Response(s)
What is it in your favour that u going to take possession on basis of it. Plaintiff lost but ur authority is most important.
question mark[email protected] 6 Response(s)
the facts of your queries are not clear, on basis of what is understood from the above an order to maintain the Status Quo if has been passed, then you can't sell, sublet, lease or do anything with the property. You have to keep the property as it was on the date of passing of the order. moreover to enable me to advice whether to continue construction or not, details of the status quo order is to be mentioned. you can with the assistance of an advocate approach the same Court that granted the order and seek for/to contest/disposal/removal of status quo and the case.
question markRegarding permanent injunction from doing second marriage by wife 2 Response(s)
Dear client, I cannot give you a definitive answer as to whether or not you will be able to win the case. But considering the fact that you do not possess any proof of your wife having said that, the court may not take any action and might dismiss it. Up and until she takes a clear action on what she said she would do, you cannot bring about any action against her either. Thank you.