Injunction means the orders of the Court directing a party to the proceedings to do or not to do certain act. It may be issued only against a party and not against a stranger or 3rd party. There are various kinds of injunction and it can be perpetual or temporary.
Preventive Relief is granted at the discretion of the court by injunction, Temporary or Perpetual. A party who asks for an injunction must be able to satisfy the court that his dealing of the matter had been fair, honest and free of any fraud or illegality. The Discretion in granting or refusing injunction must be exercised judicially and not arbitrarily. Section 36 of the Specific Relief Act states that Preventive relief is granted at the discretion of the court by way of injunctions, temporary or perpetual.
Following are the kinds of injunction:
As per the Specific Relief Act, an injunction is a sufficient legal remedy that refrains or compels a person to do a particular act. The Act specifically informs about permanent injunction. The following are the different types of injunction in specific relief act:
1. Prohibitory Injunction
2. Mandatory Injunction
3. Temporary Injunction
4. Perpetual Injunction
Prohibitory And Mandatory injunctions:
As stated earlier, the Specific Relief Act mentions different types of injunction. One of them is Prohibitory Injunction while the other one is Mandatory Injunction. Though similar to each other, there is a thin line difference between Mandatory and Prohibitory injunction. The category of injunction that forbids or prohibits the commission or continuance of an act like an act of trespass etc is called a prohibitive (or prohibitory) injunction. As the most common form of injunction, this restrains the defendant from committing a specified act. It is the most common form of injunction.
A mandatory injunction is an order that requires the defendant to act positively. The relief of mandatory injunction is a discretionary relief and can be granted in the circumstances specified under section 39 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.
Section 39 of The Specific Relief Act deals with the relief of Mandatory
Injunction, it states as under: “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.”
Mandatory Injunction can be granted under following circumstances:
Amongst different kinds of injunction Specific Relief Act, the Mandatory Injunction requires the plaintiff to fulfil the following grounds for its application:
1. There must be an obligation on part of the defendant to perform certain acts the breach of which, must be alleged by the Plaintiff.
2. Such relief must be enforceable by the court
Interlocutory Mandatory Injunctions:
The injunctions that the court grants during the interim or trial stage of a case to prevent the defendant from performing certain acts is called interlocutory injunction. Hence, by the order of interlocutory mandatory injunction, the court directs the parties to the suit to maintain status quo until the final judgement is made. This interim order of injunction will preserve/restore the status quo of the last non-contested status which preceded the pending controversy until the final hearing when full relief may be granted or to compel the undoing of those acts that have been illegally done or the restoration of that which was wrongfully taken from the party complaining.
The Hon’ble Apex Court laid down the guidelines for granting Interlocutory Mandatory Injunctions in Dorab Cawasji Warden vs Coomi Sorab Warden & Ors. “The relief of interlocutory mandatory injunctions are thus granted generally to preserve or restore the status quo of the last non-contested status which preceded the pending controversy until the final hearing when full relief may be granted or to compel the undoing of those acts that have been illegally done or the restoration of that which was wrongfully taken from the party complaining. But since the granting of such an injunction to a party who fails or would fail to establish his right at the trial may cause great injustice or irreparable harm to the party against whom it was granted or alternatively not granting of it to a party who succeeds or would succeed may equally cause great injustice or irreparable harm, courts have evolved certain guideline.
Temporary and Perpetual Injunctions:
Temporary injunctions are such as are to continue until a specified time, or until the further order of the court, and they may be granted at any stage of a suit, and are regulated by the Provisions under Order XXXIX of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
A perpetual injunction can only be granted by the decree made at the hearing and upon the merits of the suit; the defendant is thereby perpetually enjoined from the assertion of a right, or from the commission of an act, which would be contrary to the rights of the Plaintiff. An interim relief is granted to a person on the footing that, the person is prima facie entitled to the right on which is based the claim for the main relief as well as the interim relief. Perpetual injunction can be granted to prevent the breach of an obligation existing in favour of the Plaintiff whether expressly or by implication.
As under Section 38 of The Specific Relief Act, Perpetual injunction can be granted under following circumstances:
(1) Subject to the other provisions contained in or referred to by this Chapter, a perpetual injunction may be granted to the Plaintiff to prevent the breach of an obligation existing in his favour, whether expressly or by implication.
(2) When any such obligation arises from contract, the court shall be guided by the rules and provisions contained in Chapter II.
(3) When the Defendant invades or threatens to invade the plaintiff’s right to, or enjoyment of, property, the court may grant a perpetual injunction in the following cases, namely:
(a) where the defendant is trustee of the property for the Plaintiff;
(b) where there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual damage caused, or likely to be caused, by the invasion;
(c) where the invasion is such that compensation in money would not afford adequate relief;
(d) where the injunction is necessary to prevent a multiplicity of judicial proceedings.
Conclusion: To sum up succinctly, injunction is an order of Court by which an individual is required to perform, or is restrained from performing, a particular act. It is judicial process. The courts exercise their power to issue injunctions judiciously, and only when necessity exists. An injunction is generally issued only in cases where irreparable injury to the rights of an individual would result otherwise. It should be readily apparent to the court that some act has been performed, or is threatened, that will produce irreparable injury to the party seeking the injunction. An injury is generally considered irreparable when it cannot be adequately compensated by an award of damages. The pecuniary damage that would be incurred from the threatened action need not be great, however. If a loss can be calculated in terms of money, there is no irreparable injury. The consequent refusal by a court to grant an injunction is, therefore, proper. Loss of profits alone is insufficient to establish irreparable injury. The potential destruction of property is sufficient. Injunctive relief is not a matter of right, but its denial is within the discretion of the court. Whether or not an injunction will be granted varies with the facts of each case.
Injunction is no doubt a complex topic under the civil law. It involves intricate provisions and rules, and is difficult for people to understand. Hence, the best option is to seek professional guidance to ensure best legal remedy.
Before this I only know little bit about injunction petition..after reading this article I can say ,I too know about injunction..
Thank you.