Download Temporary Injunction and more Assignments Law of Torts in PDF only on Docsity!
LAW OF INJUNCTION (ESSAY WRITING)
TOPIC: TEMPORARY INJUNCTION
INTRODUCTION
In the Indian civil law system, interim injunctions are very important, especially when it comes to property, contracts, and intellectual property rights. Essentially, temporary injunctions are court orders that prohibit a party from carrying out a certain act for a predetermined amount of time, usually until the matter is resolved. These injunctions are meant to stop unfairness or irreversible harm from happening if the act is permitted to continue until the legal issue is settled. Regarding the granting of temporary injunctions, what was once a minor step in the lawsuit's or proceeding's progress towards the preservation of its subject matter—which could be property or any other right—has now taken on great significance, and occasionally it even surpasses the lawsuit's or proceeding's ultimate outcome in terms of significance. Moral values are at an all-time low in society and the judiciary specifically, and there doesn't seem to be any chance of them rising again very soon. Word Count (excluding annexure pages, abstract, footnotes and reference): 1675 words.
The issue of the Judicial Court or Tribunal is that it must first treat truth and untruth equally and provide the same treatment, protection, and hearing until it has completed its inquiry to determine which is right or wrong, false or true. This process takes a long time during which the subject matter of the dispute between the parties must be preserved by some interim measure, and it is this concern for property preservation on the part of the Judicial Court that is misused and abused by the side that has come before the Court with a wrong or false case or a doubtful case that was filed solely to take a chance. This type of unscrupulous litigator, after they win an interim injunction in their favour, attempts to extend proceedings and inflict irreparable damage and injury not only to their opposing party but also to the public's reputation and trust in the courts. As a result, it is imperative that courts at all levels exercise extreme caution, alertness, and vigilance while issuing interim injunctions throughout the course of a dispute or procedure. “Temporary injunctions are a valuable remedy to prevent irreparable harm pending the final resolution of a legal dispute, but their grant is subject to strict conditions.”^1 Section 37(1) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, deals with temporary injunctions, which are those that are to last until a set period or until further orders of the Court, and they may be obtained at any stage of the action or processes, and are controlled by the Code of Civil Procedure. 4 Sections 94 (c) and (e) of the Code of Civil Procedure provide that the Court may give a temporary injunction or make any other interlocutory order that it deems reasonable and convenient in order to avoid the objects of justice from being thwarted. Section 95 further states that when a temporary injunction is obtained in a lawsuit and it seems to the Court that there were insufficient grounds, or the plaintiff's complaint fails, and it seems to the Court that there was no reasonable or probable foundation for commencing it. On the defendant's motion, the Court may grant appropriate compensation up to the limit of the Court's financial jurisdiction. The method for granting interim injunctions and interlocutory orders is outlined in Order 39 of the C.P.C., however in this State, dramatic modifications were made by altering the terms of Order 39 by U.P. Act No. 57 of 1976. A proviso was added to Sub-Rule (2) of Rule 2 of Order 39, removing the Court's ability to award injunctions in certain cases. A proviso was added to Rule 3 stating that if an injunction is proposed without giving notice of the application to the opposing party, the Court shall record the reasons for its opinion that the (^1) Singh, G.P. Law of Injunctions. 12th ed., LexisNexis, 2020.
unlawful disturbance to a neighbor may justify the grant of an injunction and plaintiff needs to show a substantive right in respect of which the plaintiff seeks an injunction.
- In the case of Chitra v. Dhrubha Jyoti^5 It was found that if the husband secured a divorce decision against which the wife appealed, the wife might seek a temporary injunction prohibiting the husband from marrying again while the wife's appeal is pending.
- After termination of an agency, the agent has no right to remain in possession of the property given by the principal, and thus temporary injunction can be obtained, this was held in the case of Southern Roadways v. SM Krishnan.^6
CRITICAL ANALYSIS
In India, temporary injunctions are an important method for maintaining the status quo and averting irreparable injury throughout the course of a court dispute. However, their use and influence have been the subject of controversy and investigation, with various concerns and challenges arising from their use. “Temporary injunctions are an important equitable remedy available to parties in civil disputes, but their grant is subject to strict conditions to prevent their misuse.”^7 One of the most common concerns levelled about interim injunctions in India is that they can be abused. There have been cases where parties sought injunctions without appropriate grounds, resulting in legal delays and unfair conclusions. The ex parte nature of interim injunctions, which allow a party to seek an injunction without the other party being heard, often facilitates this misuse. This can result in cases when injunctions are awarded based on inadequate or erroneous information. Another concern is that interim injunctions are not applied consistently. When awarding injunctions, various courts and judges may use different standards and criteria, resulting in varied outcomes in comparable situations. This lack of consistency can undercut predictability and (^5) Chitra v. Dhrubha Jyoti, AIR 1988 Cal 98. (^6) Southern Roadways v. SM Krishnan, AIR 1990 SC 673. (^7) Takwani, C.K. Civil Procedure with Limitation Act. 9th ed., Eastern Book Company, 2021.
The length of interim injunctions is also a source of worry. In certain situations, injunctions can last for a lengthy period of time, delaying conflict settlement and causing hardship for the parties concerned. There is a need for a more efficient approach for deciding the length of injunctions based on the facts of each case. Furthermore, the obligation to provide security while requesting an injunction might be a roadblock for parties with minimal financial resources. This can result in uneven access to court, with wealthier parties better able to seek and win injunctions. To address these concerns, the process of awarding interim injunctions must be more transparent and accountable. Courts should carefully examine injunction applications to ensure that they are both reasonable and necessary. To improve uniformity and justice in their application, the criteria used to award injunctions should be more standardised and guided.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, while interim injunctions serve an important function in the Indian legal system by averting irreparable injury and safeguarding the status quo, their use is fraught with difficulties. There have been cases of mistreatment and abuse, resulting in delays and unfair outcomes. The lack of uniformity and consistency in their implementation, as well as issues about duration and access to justice, underline the need for change in this area. To overcome these shortcomings, there is a need for increased openness and accountability in the injunction-granting process. Courts should carefully analyse injunction applications to ensure that they are founded on solid legal grounds and supported by evidence. Standardisation of injunction criteria, as well as additional information on their duration, would serve to improve justice and predictability in the judicial system. Overall, while interim injunctions are a vital instrument for preserving rights and guaranteeing justice, their use must be balanced and prudent in order to prevent abuse and maintain the judicial system's integrity.
