Court : Guwahati
..... .2000. in this subsequent application for temporary injunction, there is also no pleading to that effect. all that he pleaded is that he is in possession of the suit land without any interference from any quarter. therefore, it ..... two years later, the ld. civil judge reversed his finding and concluded that the petitioner was in possession of the suit land. i have carefully gone through the application for temporary injunction filed by the petitioner. in the absence of any cogent evidence, it is not possible to conclude that the petitioner has resumed possession of the suit land since 27.1 ..... pws already examined have proved the possession of the petitioner clearly demonstrate that there have been changes in the circumstances for varying/modifying the earlier order rejecting the application for temporary injunction. accordingly, submits the ld. counsel for the petitioner, the judgement and order dated 17.9.2002 passed by the ld. civil judge is in order and the ld. district judge ..... suit land, etc. simultaneously, the petitioner also filed an application under order 39, rule l(a) and (c) of code of civil procedure (hereinafter called 'the code' for short) for temporary injunction to restrain same respondents from entering into the suit land pending disposal of the suit.3. after hearing both the parties, the ld. civil judge held that the suit land .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Guwahati
..... act dispossession from suit property is the sine qua non for granting the decree by the court trying the suit. apprehension of the appellant stretching the need for temporary injunction as disclosed in the injunction petition is that the appellant has came to know that the respondent/o.p. has been trying to lease out the said tea estate and may enter into ..... course of the proceeding, the appellant noticing certain subsequent developments, filed an application under order 39, rules 1 and 2, read with section 151 of the cpc praying for granting temporary injunction restraining the respondent/defendant from entering into any agreement relating to the suit property or from taking any financial assistance or to deliver the possession of the said garden to ..... 31.5.2005 passed in misc. case no. 22/2005 arising out of title suit no. 43/2004 by the learned civil judge (sr. division), jorhat refusing to grant temporary injunction as prayed for by the appellant is challenged.3. the appellant as plaintiff has filed the ts no. 43/2004 for recovery of possession of the suit property which is ..... any other person/persons during the pendency of the suit. on the basis of the aforesaid allegation the appellant has prayed for temporary injunction in the following manner:it is, therefore prayed that your honour may be pleased to grant temporary injunction restraining his agents, workers, representatives from entering into any agreement and delivery of possession of the property mentioned in the schedule .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
..... been claimed. prima facie, therefore, suit appears to be barred under the provision of section 34 of the specific relief act. so far as the relief of permanent injunction and temporary injunction is concerned, the said relief is not available to the plaintiff for the sole reason that admittedly the plaintiff was removed from the convenorship and membership of the committee ..... the plaintiff was permanently removed from the committee and even assuming that the removal was illegal, the mischief was already committed and in such circumstance, relief of temporary injunction or even permanent injunction is not available to the plaintiff, particularly when no declaration of his legal status and character has been claimed in the suit. the court below has not ..... appears that the court below has passed the impugned order on extraneous consideration and has travelled beyond the limit of its jurisdiction while deciding the question of grant of temporary injunction. although the court below has come to the conclusion that the necessary ingredients like balance of convenience and irreparable injuries are not available to the plaintiff, but the ..... vice-chancellor have filed this civil revision application against the order dated 18th april. 1996 passed in title suit no. 17 df 1996 by which the learned munsif granted temporary injunction by invoking the provision of section 151 of the code of civil procedure.2. the plaintiff-opposite party no. 1 filed the aforementioned suit in the court of munsif .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2003(3)KLT1148
..... petitions would fall only under the residuary article 11(t) of schedule ii, we have already indicated only three categories of cases, ie., application for arrest, attachment before judgment and temporary injunction alone have been specifically provided for under article 11(h) of schedule ii of court fees and suits valuation act. stay petition and direction petition have not been specifically provided ..... until the issue between the parties be finally decided.7. we are of the view a direction petition or stay petition in a writ petition cannot fall within the expression 'temporary injunction' under 11(h)(ii) of schedule ii of court fees act. resultantly it would fall only under article 11(t) of schedule ii of the court fees act. article 11 ..... each of the petitioners should pay rs. 100/- if an original petition is filed before the high court. however, when a petition for arrest or attachment before judgment or for temporary injunction is presented to the high court the amendment act, 2003 has stipulated that a court fee of rs. 50/- has to be remitted and not per petitioner. the words 'per ..... , stay petition etc. would fall under article 11(h)(ii) of schedule ii. before 2003 amendment 11(h) read as follows:'(h) application for arrest or attachment beforejudgment or for temporary injunction:(ii) when presented to the high court.. five rupees'.the word five rupees was substituted by 'fifty rupees' by the kerala court fees and suits valuation (amendment) act, 2003. we .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
..... executed long back. thus, i find that the findings of the courts below were vitiated by material irregularity if not illegality. the provisions of temporary injunction as contemplated under order xxxix rules 1 and 2 of the code of civil procedure cast a duty upon the courts be consider the three ..... of the co-sharers.6. mr. n.k. prasad has further submitted that none of the two courts had error discussed the ingredients of temporary injunction while granting the same such as prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss. in that view of the matter, his submission is ..... procedure for and on behalf of the plaintiff, the learned munsif, after hearing objection and on perusal of reply to the show cause granted temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiff holding that the plaintiff was in possession of the suit land and defendants no. 2 and 3 could not get ..... by the munsif at seraikella and then confirmed by the 4th additional district judge, chaibasa, in miscellaneous appeal no. 3 of 1994 by which temporary injunction granted in favour of the original plaintiff-respondent has been maintained. the other part of the order regarding amalgamation of the above mentioned suit with ..... suresh chandra jaipuria and anr. : 2scr10 . there also, both the courts below had turned down the prayer of temporary injunction of the plaintiff against the defendant-municipal corporation, delhi regarding assessment of tax but when revision was filed before the high court of delhi, relief of .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Guwahati
..... courts only the procedure prescribed under the code, what would happen in a proceeding, envisaged under section 141 where the circumstances of the case require granting of temporary injunction? since temporary injunction is granted in order to prevent the ends of justice from being defeated, imperative it is to hold that if the court, which comes in seisin of ..... is, in fact, not regarded as a proceeding within the meaning of section 141. thus, granting of temporary injunction or refusing to grant temporary injunction and/or affirming temporary injunction by an appellate court does not end the proceeding; hence, such a temporary order of injunction, in the light of the shiv shakti coop. housing, air 2003 sc 2434 (supra), is not revisable ..... will be no meaning vesting the courts of civil jurisdiction with such inherent powers as section 151 confers. considered thus, learned court below ought to have granted temporary injunction pending disposal of the application for readmission of appeal prohibiting and restraining the plaintiffs from raising construction on the suit property changing features thereof and/or alienating the ..... section 151, cpc. accordingly, the courts have to grant relief of attachment before jurisdiction, if the circumstances fall under order 38, cpc. similarly, courts will grant temporary injunction if the case satisfies order 39. so depending on the circumstances falling in the prescribed rules, the power of the court to grant specified relief would vary. therefore, .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Guwahati
..... would happen in a proceeding, envisaged under section 141, where the circumstances of the case require granting of temporary injunction since temporary injunction is granted in order to prevent the ends of justice from being defeated, imperative it is to hold that if the court, which comes in seisin of a proceeding, under ..... , dated 25.1.2006, aforementioned, mr. dey has submitted that an order directing the defendant to maintain status quo is nothing, but a direction in another form of temporary injunction and an order of temporary injunction, contends mr. dey, can be passed only when the conditions prescribed under order 39, rules 1 and 2 of the code are satisfied.4. a careful reading of ..... of order 39, rules 1 and 2 of the code only when there is a suit pending. the question, however, is as to whether it is possible to grant temporary injunction or any temporary order of restraint pending an application for restoration of the suit? in other words, the question is this whether, in the absence of a suit or when a suit ..... power of the court to grant specified relief would vary. therefore, each set of rules prescribed are distinct and different from the other and therefore, one cannot equate rules of temporary injunction with rules of attachment before judgment although all are broadly termed as interlocutory orders.26. since section 141 makes available to courts only the procedure prescribed under the code, what .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1978)80BOMLR659
..... that the court in the instant case has not taken into consideration the usual questions like prima facie case and balance of convenience which are taken into consideration while granting temporary injunction pending the disposal of the suit. according to mr. meghani, the learned judge was evidently oppressed by the fact that the defendant has entered into possession by abusing the process ..... justice.33. these two authorities of the supreme court relied upon by mr. keshavdas could have no application to the exercise of the inherent powers of the court to grant temporary injunctions under its inherent jurisdiction! when the court considers it absolutely necessary for the ends of justice to do so inasmuch as observed by the supreme court in manohar lal's ..... of contract or injury of a like kind arising out of the same contract or relating to the same property or right.15. reading these provisions it would appear that temporary injunctions could be granted in appropriate cases to maintain the status quo as when the defendant threatens to dispossess the plaintiff or otherwise cause injury to the plaintiff to use the ..... defendant threatens to dispossess the plaintiff or otherwise cause injury to the plaintiff in relation to any property in dispute in the suit,the court may by order grant a temporary injunction to restrain such act, or make such other order for the purpose of staying and preventing the wasting, damaging, alienation, sale, removal or disposition of the property as the court .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1996KAR1485
..... could not be compensated in terms of money. thus considered in my opinion the court below without considering these aspects of the matter the court had no jurisdiction to grant temporary injunction. thus considered in my opinion the orders impugned are liable to be set aside and the revision deserves to be allowed. accordingly the civil revision is allowed and orders ..... below which are impugned in this revision suffer from jurisdictional error i.e., the courts below acted illegally in exercise of jurisdiction. here when the temporary injunction of the mandatory nature has been claimed, whether temporary injunction of mandatory nature could be granted in such a case under section 37 or under order 39, particularly when these aspects of the matter have not ..... merely because the defendant has got efficacious or alternative relief of compensation, it does not mean that even because of the violation of the agreement, he is not entitled to temporary injunction. the trial court further observed that under order 39 rule 2, the defendant can be restrained from committing breach of contract or other remedy. the trial court lastly observed ..... ii) is hereby allowed with costs. it is hereby further ordered that the defendant, its men, servants and all persons claiming through it are temporarily restrained by way of temporary injunction from holding the celebration of avabhratha snana and katte pooje to the presiding deity of the defendant temple at any other place except the tank situated in s.no. 11 .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1996KAR1618; 1996(2)KarLJ109
..... the application for temporary injunction is not entitled for an order of temporary injunction. in support of this contention, it is submitted that the plaintiff in the affidavit filed in support of his application has not disclosed that on similar ..... no relief on similar application shall be granted, to avoid conflicting decisions. therefore, i am of the view that the trial court is justified in rejecting the application for temporary injunction as otherwise it would amount to abuse of the process of court.13. the defendant contended that the plaintiff has supressed the material facts in the affidavit filed along with ..... . it is also the case of the plaintiff that the trial court has not considered all the material produced before it before rejecting his application for an order of temporary injunction. further, it is also contended that though the plaintiff has produced documents to show that he has been in possession even prior to 1985 the trial court committed an ..... in fact has taken different stands at different stages in different proceedings; and the plaintiff having suppressed material facts in this suit he is not entitled for an order of temporary injunction. on these facts, the trial court after considering the material produced before it rejected the application filed by the plaintiff.7. challenging the said order this appeal is filed. .....Tag this Judgment!