Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Proviso to Or.39, R.3 – Trial Court granted ex parte injunction in favour of petitionerherein (original plaintiff) – Respondents herein (original defendants) invoked supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court u/Art.227 – The High Court held, inter-alia, that the trial Court has not considered the suit in its entirety and no reasoning as mandated in terms of proviso of Or.39 R.3 CPC has been recorded – Thus, the order passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division) granting ex parte injunction was set aside – Correctness:
Held: Ordinarily an order of injunction u/Or.39, CPC may not be granted ex parte – Rule 3 carves out an exception – Conferment of this privilege on the party seeking an injunction is accompanied by an obligation cast on the court to record reasons for its opinion and an obligation cast on the applicant to comply with the requirements of Clauses (a) and (b) of the proviso – Both the provisions are mandatory – This Court is of the opinion that if the court is satisfied of non-compliance by the applicant with the provisions contained in the proviso then on being so satisfied the court which was persuaded to grant an ex parte ad interim injunction confiding in the applicant that having been shown indulgence by the court he would comply with the requirements of the proviso, it would simply vacate the ex parte order of injunction without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case leaving it open to the parties to have a hearing on the grant or otherwise on the order of injunction but bipartite only – The applicant would be told that by his conduct he has deprived the opponent of an opportunity of having an early or urgent hearing on merits and, therefore, the ex parte order of injunction cannot be allowed to operate any more – In the instant case, hearing to take place before the trial Court on 12.08.2025 – Trial Court is directed to hear both the parties in so far as the prayer of the plaintiff for grant of appropriate injunction is concerned and decide the injunction application on merits – No need to interfere with the impugned order of the High Court. [Paras 5, 7, 8]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Ankit Gyan. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.