Temporary Injunction CPC
Temporary Injunction under CPC
What is a Temporary Injunction?
A Temporary Injunction is a temporary order issued by a court to restrain a party from doing or continuing an act that may cause irreparable injury or damage during the pendency of a suit. It is a preventive and protective measure granted until the final decision on the matter.
Relevant Provision in CPC:
Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC govern temporary injunctions.
Purpose of Temporary Injunction:
To maintain status quo between parties.
To prevent irreparable loss or injury which cannot be compensated by damages.
To ensure that the final decree is effective and meaningful.
Types of Injunctions:
Temporary (Interim) Injunction: Granted during the pendency of a suit.
Perpetual (Permanent) Injunction: Granted after the final decision in the suit.
When Can Temporary Injunction be Granted? (Order 39, Rule 1)
The court may grant a temporary injunction when:
Preventing Breach of Contract or Injury to Property:
To restrain a defendant from committing a breach of contract or causing injury to the plaintiff’s property.
To Prevent Mischief or Damage:
Where the defendant threatens or intends to remove or dispose of property with intent to defeat the plaintiff’s claim.
To Prevent Dispute from Escalating:
To prevent interference with the plaintiff's possession or enjoyment of property or rights.
Procedure for Granting Temporary Injunction (Order 39, Rule 2)
The plaintiff must file a written application with supporting affidavit.
The court may grant the injunction ex parte (without hearing the defendant) if urgency demands.
The court will also fix a date for the defendant to be heard.
Security may be required from the plaintiff to compensate the defendant if injunction is later found wrongful.
Grounds / Principles for Granting Temporary Injunction:
The Supreme Court and various High Courts have laid down the following three main conditions, often called the triple test:
Prima facie case:
There must be a prima facie (on first impression) case in favor of the plaintiff.
Irreparable injury or loss:
The plaintiff must show that they will suffer irreparable injury if the injunction is not granted. Monetary compensation is not an adequate remedy.
Balance of convenience:
The inconvenience or hardship caused to the plaintiff if the injunction is refused must be greater than the hardship caused to the defendant if it is granted.
Important Case Laws:
1. American Express Bank Ltd. v. Kalpana Sharma, AIR 2000 SC 1066
The Supreme Court reiterated the principles of granting a temporary injunction.
Held that the test of irreparable injury is of utmost importance.
The Court emphasized that temporary injunctions should not be granted mechanically but based on sound judicial discretion.
2. Dalpat Kumar v. Prahlad Singh, AIR 1993 SC 276
The Court held that a temporary injunction cannot be granted unless all three conditions — prima facie case, irreparable injury, and balance of convenience — are satisfied.
Mere apprehension of loss is not enough.
3. Orissa Cement Ltd. v. Bihar State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd., AIR 1991 SC 1397
The Supreme Court explained that the object of a temporary injunction is to preserve the status quo and prevent irreparable injury during the pendency of the suit.
When Temporary Injunction Will Not Be Granted:
When the plaintiff has an alternate remedy, such as damages.
When the plaintiff has not come with clean hands (i.e., has acted unfairly).
When granting the injunction would cause greater hardship to the defendant.
When the balance of convenience favors the defendant.
Duration of Temporary Injunction:
It lasts till the disposal of the suit or until the court modifies or vacates it.
It is a temporary measure and not a final adjudication.
Summary Table:
| Aspect | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Legal Provision | Order 39, Rules 1 & 2 CPC |
| Purpose | To prevent irreparable injury during pendency of suit |
| Conditions for Granting | 1. Prima facie case 2. Irreparable injury 3. Balance of convenience |
| Procedure | Application with affidavit; ex parte possible; security may be required |
| Duration | Till final disposal or modification by court |
| Key Case Laws | American Express Bank v. Kalpana Sharma Dalpat Kumar v. Prahlad Singh Orissa Cement Ltd. v. Bihar State Industrial Dev. Corp. |
Practical Example:
Suppose A sues B for infringement of trademark. A fears that B may destroy the infringing goods during the trial. A can seek a temporary injunction restraining B from destroying such goods until the suit is decided.
RELATED Blog
0 comments