Interim injunction – Grant of – When not proper – High Court restored the order of the small causes court and granted injunction in favour of Respondent No.1 restraining the appellant from dispossessing him or creating any third-party interest in the disputed premises – Interference with: Held: High Court erred in granting the injunction in favour of Respondent No.1 – Respondent No.1 failed to establish a prima facie case in his favour as the question of tenancy rights claimed by him is pending adjudication before the Small Causes Court – Balance of convenience also tilts in favour of the Appellant as the disputed area is merely 550 square feet out of the total area of 22,000 square feet and the Appellant has already entered into a leave and license agreement with one M/s KMG Global covering a built-up area of 2,200 square feet – Thus, the injunction inordinately impeded the entire redevelopment project for a relatively small disputed portion – Moreover, the Appellant would suffer irreparable injury if the injunction is allowed to operate, given that the protracted delay is not only causing substantial financial losses but also affecting the Appellant’s contractual obligations which cannot be adequately compensated at a belated stage – Impugned order set aside. [Paras 16, 17, 19]
Interim injunction – Grant of – Pre-requisites for – Discussed. [Para 15]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Divya Pandey. 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.