The temporary injunction is to maintain the status quo in the suit and for preventing the suit from becoming infructuous. It is filed through an applicant, it is essential that there should be the same suit pending in the court at the timing of application.

Gujarat Bottling Co. v/s Coca Cola Co., 1995 SC

S.C Aggarwal, J.

1. The applicant has to, first of all, have to prove that he has a prima facie case. Here the court will examine whether the applicant has a contestable matter i.e. whether the court will be satisfied on the basis of fact presented by the applicant that the applicant deserves to be heard on those facts w.r.t act complaint of.

2. The court will also examine the conduct of the applicant i.e. whether he is acting mala-fide or bona-fide or whether the applicant himself is negligent in the past. It is also to be examined whether the applicant himself acquiesced to the conduct of the respondent.

3. Finally, the court will examine the balance of convenience for that purpose the court will first examine the effect upon the applicant if the injunction is not granted i.e. what is the extent or nature of the losses which will be suffered by the losses and also whether they are irreparable i.e. cannot be compensated. Thereafter the court will examine the extent and nature of the loss to the respondent if the injunction is granted and whether it is irreparable.

Thirdly, the court will draw a balance b/w the two i.e. the court will weigh the two losses against each other and will examine who will suffer greater and irreparable. Whosoever chance of suffering greater, the balance of convenience will be tilted in his favor, and accordingly the court will pass or refuse the injunction.

While passing the order of temporary injunction, the court may also require the applicant to deposit the security for cost.

Note: – a.) A temporary injunction cannot be granted to restrain a party to file criminal proceedings.

           b.) There cannot be an injunction order if the COA will arise in the future.

Ex-parte Injunction/ Ad-interim injunction.

Morgan Starley v/s Kartik Das, 1995 SC

  1. The applicant shall make a distinct prayer for ex-parte injunction.
  2. Bi-parte injunction is a general rule and ex-parte injunction is an exception.
  3. For ex-parte injunction, the applicant has to prove the urgency and overwhelming necessity for the order i.e. if immediate order not passed then the irreparable loss will be suffered by the applicant and also the very purpose of granting bi-parte will get defeated.
  4. The burden of proof for above lies strictly upon the applicant.
  5. The applicant should be acting on the utmost good faith.
  6. The court will also examine the conduct of the applicant as to whether he has acquiesced to the conduct of the opposite party or whether he acting mala-fide or whether the application is filed with undue delay and there is no justification for such delay.
  7. Ex-parte order will be temporary order and the court has to conduct bi-parte hearing to finalize the order.
  8. The order has to be speaking order.

Agriculture Produce Market Committee Gondal V/s Giridhar Bhai Ramji Bhai Chhaniyara.

It was held that injunction cannot be granted for a right which will arise in the future.

Seema Arsad Jahir v/s Municipal Corp. of Greater Bombay & Others., 2006 SC

It was held that in case of demolition of the building, the court will normally be in favor of the applicant as the demolition in itself render the suit infructuous. However, all the guidelines have to be examined i.e. the applicant has to prove prima facie case, good conduct and balance of convenience, etc.

You cannot copy content of this page