Skip to main content

INJUNCTION

 INJUNCTION

BY NUPUR GARG

INTRODUCTION 

In general, it is a legal order whereby a person is either restrained from doing an act, or to perform an act. It prohibits a person from either committing an act or to put a full stop to what he has been doing already.

Purpose of granting an injunction:

  1. To ensure that the legal rights of the person seeking injunction is not prejudiced by the unnecessary acts, if any of the other party.

  2. To preclude the possibility of any injury to such person which may be caused if the relief of injunction isn't granted by the Hon'ble Court

  3. Preservation of suit property as status quo i.e., as it is, in order to prevent it from being misused, misappropriated or destroyed in any other way by any person.

An injunction by its very name means a preventive relief. The grant of an injunction is an equitable remedy that prevents a defendant party from doing certain demonstrations or certain acts so that they are not bothersome or do not cause any nuisance to the plaintiff.

When a court comes with a judgment in such a suit, the parties must abide by and adhere to the ruling, in the absence of which there can be severe monetary penalties or even imprisonment in a few cases.

TYPES OF INJUNCTIONS

  1. Preliminary Injunction

A preliminary injunction, which is also known as an ad-interim injunction, is assigned to a plaintiff prior to a trial. preliminary injunction preserves the subject matter in its existing condition to prevent any dissolution of the plaintiff’s rights, and thereby render him/her the possibility of immediate relief.

  1. Preventive Injunctions

A preventive injunction is an adjudication that forces an individual to abstain from doing an action that is preventive, prohibitive or negative. The injunction intends to prevent a threatened injury, preserve the status quo, and reserve the continued commission of an ongoing wrong.

  1. Mandatory Injunction

Considered as the most rigorous of all injunctions, a mandatory injunction directs the defendant to perform an act. For example, if a court orders the removal of a building or structure due to misplaced construction, then it fits the description of a mandatory injunction.

  1. Temporary Restraining Order

A temporary restraining order is just what its name suggests, as the same is valid until the period of restraining order draws to a closure. The court grants it to preserve the status quo of the subject of the controversy until the hearing of an application for a temporary injunction. Through it, it also seeks to prevent any instance of unnecessary and irreparable injury.

  1. Permanent Injunction

At the time of final judgement issues the permanent injunction for granting a final relief to the applicant. These injunctions remain constant if the conditions that produced them are permanent.

DISOBEDIENCE OF BREACH OF AN ORDER OF INJUNCTION

Although an injunction is a remedy in itself, in the event of a breach of this order, there needs to be another remedy to protect the complainant. The Latin term ‘Ubi jus ibi remedium’ which means where there is a right there is remedy is often used in explaining this concept as courts also need a remedy against the person who breaches their order to prevent further dishonoring of their orders.

The remedies available for a breach of injunction are as follows:

Order 39 Rule 2A of the Civil Procedure Code– The CPC states that the court that granted the order or any other court to which the case was referred to may order the attachment of property of the individual, culpable of such disobedience, in view of the ‘disobedience of the breach of injunction’ or in view of the disobedience of the terms under which the injunction was granted. The court may also require the person to be detained in civil prison for a period of time not exceeding three months. However it must be noted that nothing attached under this order shall remain in force for a period of more than one year and if at the end of one year the breach continues to occur, the attached property may be rented out and the court will award compensation as it finds appropriate to the injured party and pay balance if any to the party entitled to it.

Order 21- Rule 32 of the Civil Procedure Code– It provides that a defendant who failed to comply with the decree will in the first place forfeit his right of ownership and the Court may later seize his property at its discretion.

CASES WHERE PERPETUAL INJUNCTION IS GRANTED:

When the defendant invades or threatens to invade the plaintiff's right to, or enjoyment of, property, the Court may grant permanent injunction:

  1. Where the defendant is the trustee of the property for the plaintiff, or

  2. Where there exists no standard for ascertaining damage, or

  3. Where compensation in money is not an adequate relief, or

  4. Where injunction is necessary to prevent multiplicity of proceedings.

CONCLUSION 

Injunction is an equity-based relief. It is completely at the court’s discretion to grant an injunction or to refuse it. The relief cannot be claimed as an affair of right however worthwhile the applicant’s case may be. The power to grant an injunction must, therefore, be exercised with the utmost prudence, vigilance, and care. It is an extraordinary and sensitive power that is associated with the risks of imposing losses or disadvantages upon the innocent party. Thus unlike all other things in this world, the grant of an injunction is also not absolute.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more