Suppose you stay in an apartment with your aged parents who are ailing with heart diseases, and the person in your neighborhood keeps playing loud music. In such a situation, you would request them twice or thrice not to play such loud music. If they don’t listen even after that, you would request the court of law to intervene and help. For such a thing to happen you will have to file an injunction suit. Thus, an injunction is writ or remedy that the court provides to the plaintiff or the aggrieved party, to restrict or stop a particular activity of the defendant. However, it is necessary that the aggrieved party must have to prove as to why such an injunction has been filed, i.e. they must prove that there has been irreparable damage caused to them. Irreparable damage means those damages that cannot be compensated through monetary value.
Injunction cannot be claimed as a right, but it is an equitable and discretionary relief of the court of law, which should be granted only when it is absolutely necessary.
Types of injunction
There are two types of injunction, preliminary and permanent injunction. The former injunction is given when there is an urgent need for such injunction, prior to the trial. These are enforceable only till the final judgment after the trial is pronounced. The latter injunction is pronounced when the complete trial is done and after following all the procedures. When permanent injunction is ordered, then the defendants have to stop acting in a way or act as per orders. The preliminary injunction can also be pronounced as the permanent and final injunction if the aggrieved parties win the case.
There is another type of injunction too, i.e. temporary restraining order, which is limited by time and scope. Generally, it is valid only up to 10 days. This time is provided so that the court can look clearly and deeply into the matter.
Temporary Injunction:
Section 94 and 95 of Civil Procedure Code (CPC) concerns with the temporary injunction. Section 94(c) states that grant a temporary injunction and in case of disobedience commit the person guilty thereof to the civil prison and order that his property be attached and sold, and section 94(e) says that make such other interlocutory orders as may appear to the Court to be just and convenient. Section 95 states that if the plaintiff fails to prove his point, then he is liable to reasonable compensation to the defendant on his claim.
Order XXXIX:
Rule 1 enlists the situations when a court may grant a temporary injunction.
- Any property in dispute in a suit is in danger of being wasted, damaged or alienated by any party to the suit, or wrongfully sold in execution of a decree, or
- the defendant threatens, or intends, to remove or dispose of his property with a view to defrauding his creditors,
- the defendant threatens to dispossess the plaintiff or otherwise cause injury to the plaintiff in relation to any property in dispute in the suit.
Rule 2 provides an injunction to restrain repetition or continuance of breach of any kind.
Rule 3 states that the court has to provide the defendant party a notice in any form, before providing injunction to the aggrieved parties. However, as per Rule 3A, the case has to be disposed of within 30 days.
Rule 4 states that any order for an injunction may be discharged, or varied, or set aside by the Court, on an application thereto by any party dissatisfied with such order.
Rule 5 of the CPC clearly states that if it directs an order to any corporation, then it includes its members too.
It is necessary to note that the court must take into account[1] prima facie[2], balance of convenience[3] and irreparable injury[4] of the case.
Perpetual or permanent injunction[5]
Section 38 of Specific Relief Act states that such a relief is given to the plaintiff to utilise to prevent the breach of an already existing obligation of the defendant, or even in case where the defendant invades or threatens the right of the plaintiff. Section 37, however states that relief can be granted on the basis of the merits of the case.
Mandatory injunction:
Section 39 of Specific Relief Act provides the court, the right to compel the performance of a specific act of the defendant, to prevent breach.
Section 41 of Specific Relief Act: Injunction when refused
Under this section, injunction cannot be granted in the following cases:
- To restrict or restrain a person from carrying on with the judicial proceeding pending cases, but to prevent the multiplicity of the cases in the court, they can restrict.
- To restrict the cases that are brought forward in the court proceedings, that are not subordinate to the cases they seek injunction from.
- To restraint any person from applying to any legislative body.
- Where injunction is filed to proceed a criminal matter
- To prevent the breach of contract
- To prevent nuisance, which even may not be reasonably clear to be a nuisance
- To prevent a continuing breach in which the plaintiff is acquiesced
- Where other effective relief can be acquired, except for the case of breach of contract
- When the plaintiff or his agents behave in such a way that it disentitles them to be assistance of courts.
- When the plaintiff has no personal interest in the matter.
Disobedience or breach of injuction, its consequences
Order XXXIX:
Rule 2A of the Civil Procedure Code provides the consequences of disobeying the injunction passed by the court of law or its breach. It says that those who disobey or breach the granted injunction, then either the court which granted the injunction or the court having jurisdiction can detain such person in civil jail for not more than 3 months or till the court directs orders for his release. The court may also ask the disobeying person to attach the property, and if even after a period of one year, he continues to disobey or breach the orders, his property may be sold, and compensation, as think fit by the court is paid to the aggrieved parties, and if there remains any amount, it is paid back to the entitled persons.
“The views of the authors are personal“
References
[1] M. Gurudas and Ors. Vs. Rasaranjan and Ors. AIR 2006 SC 3275
[2] Martin Burn Ltd. vs. R.N. Banerjee1958 AIR 79, 1958 SCR 514
[3] Orissa State Commercial Transport Corporation Ltd. v. Satyanarayan Singh, (1974) 40 Cut LT 336
[4] Anwar Elahi vs Vinod Misra And Anr. 1995 IVAD Delhi 576, 60 (1995) DLT 752, 1995 (35) DRJ 341
[5] Jujhar Singh vs. Giani Talok Singh AIR 1987 P H 34
