Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: comparative chart of corresponding sections of 1983 act Court: allahabad Year: 2004

Mar 11 2004 (HC)

Akbar Ali and ors. Vs. District Judge and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Mar-11-2004

Reported in : 2004(3)AWC2543

..... in the action if the uncertainty were resolved in his favour at the trial. the need for such protection must be weighed against the corresponding need of the defendant to be protected against injury resulting from his having been prevented from excersing his own legal rights for which he could ..... it means only that injuries cannot be compensated in terms of money. in ascertaining the balance of convenience, the courts are to weigh and compare the substantial mischief that is likely to be done to the plaintiff. if injunction is refused, it is held that while courts are considering balance ..... rules 1 and 2, code of civil procedure which the court considers irreparable before his legal right can be established on trial. lastly the comparative inconvenience which is likely to ensue from withholding temporary injunction would be greater than that which is likely to arise from granting it. prima facie ..... its alleged violation are both contested and uncertain and remain uncertain till they are established at the trial on evidence. the court at this stage acts on certain well-settled principles of administration of this form of interlocutory remedy which is both temporary and discretionary. the object of the interlocutory injunction, ..... ingredients are to be proved on affidavits as envisaged under order xxxix, rule 1, code of civil procedure. the power given to courts to act on affidavits it is not subject to the provisions of order xix, rules 1 and 2, code of civil procedure.'9. it has been .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //