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.
- The extent of damages being an adequate remedy.
- 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.
- 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;
- 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.
- 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;
- 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.
- Whether the grant or refusal of the injunction will adversely affect the interest of general public which can or cannot be compensated otherwise.
Share:
Share on
×