Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mandatory injunctions specific relief act Page 1 of about 6,577 results (0.065 seconds)

Aug 13 2007 (HC)

The State of A.P. Represented by Collector Vs. Konala Subbireddy

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2008(1)ALD401; 2008(1)ALT486

..... event of the concerned authority not carrying out, by virtue of section 39 of the specific relief act for carrying out the said obligation and to enforce thereof, the relief of mandatory injunction can be prayed for. section 39 of the specific relief act, 1963 deals with mandatory injunctions and the said provision reads as hereunder:mandatory injunctions:- when, to prevent the breach of an obligation, it is necessary to compel the performance ..... l.a.o. has become final and the plaintiff cannot get it reopened by requesting the court by issuing a mandatory injunction. there is no provision under land acquisition act or under the specific relief act under which a mandatory injunction can be issued in respect of the act, which law does not authorize the land acquisition officer to do so. this court has no jurisdiction to entertain the ..... a reference on the concerned authority or officer in the event of failure in doing so for enforcement of such obligation in the light of section 39 of the specific relief act, a suit for mandatory injunction of this form can be maintained. while elaborating his submissions the learned counsel also would point out that when there is an infringement of a civil right, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 18 1950 (HC)

Raghunath and ors. Vs. the Municipal Board and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1952All465

..... , because the board is under no obligation to him--its duty being merely to relinquish the land to the collector. a reference is made to section 55, specific relief act.31. under section 65, specific relief act, a mandatory injunction can be issued 'to prevent the breach of an obligation.' no doubt an obligation is co-related to a legal right and normally one would expect that the ..... personal interest in the matter. this is provided in clause (k) of section 56, specific relief act. personal interest and personal right may be said to be more or less the same. we have, therefore, to find ..... possession of and being disposed of by the collector of mathura in accordance with the aforesaid rules, and necessary directions be issued against defendants 1 and 2 by way of mandatory injunction to enforce their statutory liabilities.4. defendant 6, dr. (capt.) suri did not contest the suit. the defence of the other defendants, inter alia, was that the plaintiff had no ..... connection to the words 'as an act of grace', and 'ordinarily' in rule 545 and reliance has been placed upon hens kelsert's 'general theory of law and state' pp. 58 and 75, cutler v. wands-worth stadium ltd. (1949) 1 all. e. r. 544 and jivan lal v. ramtuji bhaiji : air1945bom119 .24. no mandatory injunction can be granted unless the applicant has .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 03 1995 (HC)

Chinnappa Vs. Srinivasa Reddy

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1996KAR932; 1996(1)KarLJ114

..... pass orders in the interest of justice and to avoid the abuse of process of the court. but the substantive relief which a person wants to claim, such as mandatory injunction under section 39 of specific relief act, asserting the rights vested in the person who claims mandatory injunction and corresponding obligation on the defendant of that case or the opposite party, and the court if after trial ..... finds that the rights and obligations or breach is established, is entitled to grant mandatory injunction. thus considered, in my opinion, firstly, the ..... fencing standing on the land could not have been granted by a mandatory injunction at the instance of the defendant in the suit filed by the plaintiff and especially in a case where the plaintiff's case is that the fencing had been standing since 20 years. section 39 of specific relief act very clearly provides that when to prevent the breach of an obligation .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 14 1999 (HC)

Geeta Pump (Private) Limited Vs. District Judge and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR2000All58

..... was held in the case of amitash textiles v. u. p.s.e.b. , 1996 (1) hvd 402 paragraph 12 & 14. section 41(h) of the specific relief act provides that no mandatory injunction shall be granted if equally efficacious remedy is otherwise available to the plaintiff as was laid in the case of sunil kumar v. ram prakash, air 1988 sc 576 ..... the present case mandatory injunction were sought for to compel the board to commit breach of obligations as contained ..... unsupervisable by the court renders the very basis of the suit itself not maintainable in view of section 14 of the specific relief act.30. the eighth suit being o. s. no. 680 of 1997 filed in december, 1997 seeking mandatory injunction restraining the board from drawing overhead 11 kv feeder line in order to give supply to the petitioner from such 11 ..... discussion made hereinbefore. 72. the court had also sometimes granted relief virtually granting the whole relief claimed in the suit in the form of an interim order and sometimes even more than the relief asked for which would be apparent from the respective relief granted. 73. section 39 of the specific relief act provides that mandatory injunction shall be granted to prevent breach of obligation. whereas in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 05 2003 (HC)

Tallapragada Narasimhamurthy Vs. Director, School Education and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2003(3)ALD482

..... an obligation, it is necessary to compel the performance of certain acts which the court is capable of enforcing, the court may in ..... b4. the direction of this nature by way of mandatory injunction, in my considered opinion, cannot be granted for the reason that it will amount to directing the university to violate the procedure that is to act in violation of law which is not permissible. section 39 of the specific relief act, 1963 dealing with mandatory injunctions reads as hereunder:'when, to prevent the breach of ..... its discretion grant an injunction to prevent the breach complained of, and also to ..... to a date of birth is definitely something different from granting the relief of mandatory injunction to alter or to carry out the said date of birth in the service records of university employees. the learned counsel further had drawn my attention to section 39 of specific relief act, 1963 and had contended that in the light of the language of section 39 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 04 2004 (SC)

State of Haryana Vs. State of Punjab and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : JT2004(5)SC72; 2004(6)SCALE75; (2004)12SCC673

..... a party is prevented from doing a particular thing or continuing with a particular action (ibid) section 38. a mandatory injunction on the other hand commands an act to be done and is provided for under section 39 of the specific relief act, 1963 which reads:'mandatory injunctions- when, to prevent the breach of an obligation, it is necessary to compel the performance of certain ..... acts which the court is capable of enforcing, the court may in its discretion grant an injunction to prevent the breach complained of, and also to compel ..... before we consider these authorities it must be kept in mind that as far as this country is concerned the general law relating to injunctions is contained in sections 36 to section 42 of the specific relief act, 1963. although these provisions may not limit the powers of this court under article 131 nevertheless they provide valuable guidelines as to the ..... nature of this form of equitable relief. an injunction may be permanent (perpetual) or temporary specific relief act, 1963 section 36. a permanent injunction is final and conclusive of the facts in the context of which the injunction is granted. a temporary injunction by contrast is granted on a prima facie view of the facts and, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 04 2000 (HC)

Assam State Electricity Board and ors. Vs. North Western Cachar Tea Co ...

Court : Guwahati

..... ex parte justice will be the sacrificial goat. no doubt the court has the power to grant ex parte mandatory injunction in exceptional cases but that can-not be a normal rule. section 39 of the specific relief act provides for mandatory injunction and that section is quoted below : '39. mandatory injunction.-- when, to prevent the breach of an obligation, it is necessary to compel the performance of certain ..... acts which the court is capable of enforcing, the court may in its discretion grant an injunction to prevent the breach complained of, and also to ..... compel performance of the requisite acts.' 6-a. regarding mandatory injunction it can be said as follows : (i) a mandatory injunction is a discretionary relief and delay is a factor which has to be taken into account while granting it where a case .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 17 1909 (PC)

The Advocate-general of Bombay Vs. Haji Esmail Hassam

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 5Ind.Cas.213

..... a breach of the law; nor do i think that in a proper case the court would be precluded by the terms of section 56(k) of the specific relief act from granting him a mandatory injunction. but i am as strongly of opinion that it is always for the court to decide what is a proper case before resorting to that extreme remedy. now ..... not merely a statutory expression of powers which have always existed and been fully recognised. last, reading section 44 of the amended letters patent with section 56(k) of the specific relief act, it is contended that any such power as the advocate-general now claims is expressly barred by the statute. ingenious, though all these arguments are, i still feel bound by ..... advocate-general's suit, the basis of which was that the local authorities had perfectly bona fide but by reason of lack of intelligence, acted ultra vires, and the object of it was to obtain a mandatory injunction of a ruinous character against an innocent individual. and this distinction seems to me to run through all the english cases to which i have ..... relief against a private individual. and it appears to me that the ground of all the decisions is reducible to equally clear principles. where the act complained of is found to be in fact a public nuisance, as in attorney-general v. barker 83 l.t. 245 : 16 t.l.r. 502, private individuals suffering from the nuisance have obtained redress by mandatory injunctions .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 10 2006 (HC)

A.V.N. Prasad S/O A.V. Sheshaiah Vs. Sita Bai Raj Purohit W/O Alte Jay ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : 2007(1)KarLJ216

..... that he is not entitled to the relief of mandatory injunction.11. section 39 of the specific relief act would relate to mandatory injunction. the right to obtain a mandatory injunction when refused is stated thus:delay in seeking relief - a person who has not shown due diligence in applying to the court for relief, will in general, be debarred from obtaining a mandatory injunction. a mandatory injunction should only be granted to those ..... , an identical question fell for consideration in the case of krothapalli satyanarayana v. koganti ramaiah and ors. reported in : air1983sc452 , which would relate to section 39 of the specific relief act relating to declaration and mandatory injunction. the apex court has ruled thatif there is an encroachment and if the suit is brought within the period of limitation, ordinarily the ..... wall ww-1 and clear the passage of encroachment.12. having considered the evidence on record, i am of the view that the plaintiff is not entitled for extraordinary relief of mandatory injunction. the substantial question of law which is framed is liable to be answered against the plaintiff, in as much as, he has acquiesced his right to seek a ..... has been knocking the doors of the khb for some time. but however he was unsuccessful. this should have prompted the plaintiff to approach the court seeking the relief of mandatory injunction based on the title at an earliest point of time. that has not been done. it is to be noticed that the plaintiff has allowed the grass to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 19 2006 (HC)

Maddirala Babu Rao and anr. Vs. Mandluri Venkaiah and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2007(1)ALD372

..... high court of a.p. in the s.a. no. 400 of 1969, dated 3.11.1970.(c) under section 41 of the specific relief act, grant of mandatory injunction for removal of the structures of the defendant ought not to be granted in the absence of proof of plaintiffs right to the property in question and user of ..... of the defendant the plaintiff has to plea and prove the legal right of easement and in the absence of the same the relief of the mandatory injunction ought not to be granted.(b) under section 41 of the specific relief act the mandatory injunction for demolition of existing structures ought not to be granted when the plaintiff kept quite for number of years (vide judgment of the ..... representing the appellants-defendants 4 and 5 with all emphasis contended that in the pleadings specifically it was pleaded that these were old steps and such old steps alone had been replaced and when such steps have been in existence for sufficiently a long time, the relief of mandatory injunction at this distant point of time cannot be granted. i had given my anxious ..... file of additional district judge, ongole and the appellate court, after framing the point for consideration at paragraph 7 'whether the plaintiff-1st respondent is entitled for the reliefs of mandatory injunction and permanent injunction as prayed for in the plaint', proceeded to discuss the evidence available on record commencing from paragraphs 8 to 17 and ultimately came to the conclusion that the appeal .....

Tag this Judgment!


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