A person wrote a story book. A filmmaker read his book. The filmmaker started making a film using the story written by that person in his book. The film was going to be released and the writer got to know about the act of the filmmaker of copying his story. The writer went to the court demanding to restrain the release of that film. He claimed that he would provide all the evidences to prove the wrongful act of the filmmaker and pleaded in the court to forbid the release of the film till a decision or a judgement is passed by the Court in this case. Can a Court do so? If yes, then will the court order to restrain the release of film?
Look at another situation. A person went to the court alleging that his neighbour is trying to encroach his property for making a wall on his land. He pleaded before the court to restrain his neighbour permanently from encroaching his land. Whether the restrain demanded in both of the cases same or not? If not, then which one is a valid restrain that will be provided by the court?
These questions can be answered by understanding the concept of Injunction.
WHAT IS INJUNCTION ?
“Injunction is a judicial order restraining a person from initiating or continuing an action that is threatening or infringing the legal right of another or compelling a person to do any particular act.”
This defines Injunction as an order by the court to-
1. Restrain a person from doing a certain act or
2. Compel person to do any particular act
Injunction is a sort of Right in Personem not a Right in Rem. Injunction can be claimed by any of the parties to the suit whether it be defendant or be plaintiff against each other, but not against any third party. A party can claim for injunction only against the other party to the suit, not against any third party who is not a party to the suit.
Claim for injunction can be against-
• Threatened wrong (e.g., demolishing any house, shop, etc)
• Existing wrong (e.g., an industry releases waste in a river and water of that river is used in a nearly village by the people)
• Restoration of status (to preserve the subject matter from any altercation till the final judgement is provided in this regard)
KINDS OF INJUNCTION
Generally, there are two types of injunction orders that are passed by the court -
1. Temporary injunction (or interim injunction)
2.Permanent injunction (or perpetual injunction)
PRINCIPLES OF INJUNCTION
• Prima Facie Case has to be established for claiming injunction. It means the person demanding for injunction has to submit evidences and documents of interference by another and all like that.
• Balance of convenience should be there. The court aims to provide the justice and the relief of equity and good conscience using the provision of injunction.
• Presence of irreparable loss is another important principle for claiming injunction. Injunction is generally claimed in those situations where the monetary compensation does not seem to be an enough solution.
• The person who comes to the Court claiming injunction must come with clean hands. It means that person must have not done any wrongful act on his part in this regard.
• There is a provision of discretionary reliefs in case of injunction. The decision of providing the injunction is at the discretion of the court. The court is not bound to provide injunction.
INJUNCTION AND STAY ORDER
Injunction is an order by a court to restrain a person from doing an act that is infringing someone’s legal right or to compel a person to do a particular act where the monetary compensation does not seem to be an enough solution.
Stay order is an order passed by the court to postpone or stop the judicial proceeding. It is also known as the stay of suits.
Injunction is provided in order to stop an act that can cause irreparable loss to the party or has infringed someone’s legal right where compensation in terms of money is not an enough remedy. Whereas Stay Order is passed by the court in order to prevent the courts from trying suits on same subject matter simultaneously at the same time that can provide contradictory judgements and create confusions.
Stay order can be understood in a better way through following example -
There were four brothers living in a house. They filed a case for partition of the house in a court. While the hearings of this case were going on, a stranger filed a case in another court alleging the ownership of that house. As the subject matter in both of the suits was same i.e., house, Stay Order was passed for staying the partition case till the decision was passed in the ownership case. If the decision in ownership case is passed in favor of brothers, then their partition case can be resumed.
Injunction is generally of two kinds- Temporary injunction and Permanent injunction. And Stay Order can be passed to put stay on proceedings and on the executions (of any certain act).
Hence, stay order stops the actions of the courts, while injunction stops the actions of others apart from the courts.
TEMPORARY INJUNCTION AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION
“Prevent, Prohibit or Restrain someone from something”
An order passed by the court to restrain a party temporarily from doing a specified act and can be granted only until the disposal of suit or until the further orders of the Court. This order is passed in the pendency of the suit.
Interim Injunction can be granted at any stage of the suit i.e., in between the pending case, till final decision is passed. There is no requirement of all the evidences to claim this injunction. This injunction is regulated by the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.
Order 39 of CPC mentions about temporary injunction, but doesn’t define it. It merely provides the situation under Rule 1 and Rule 2 as to where the relief of temporary injunction can be granted.
It is an order passed by the court restraining a party permanently from doing a specified act and can be granted only on the merits at the conclusion of trail after hearing both the parties to the suit.
The permanent injunction can only be granted by the decree made at the hearing and upon the merits (evidences) of the suit.
Governed by the Sections 38 to 42 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, this injunction permanently restrains one party for assertion of a right or from commission of an act, which would be contrary to the rights of other party.
■ In the first case provided in the Introduction Section, the Injunction demanded by the writer was the sort of temporary injunction. The writer asked for restraining the release of film till the final decision was passed by the court. Hence, it was an interim or temporary induction. While in the second case, the person demanded for a permanent restrain on his neighbor from encroaching his land. Hence, there was a demand of Permanent Injunction.
An interesting fact is present here. In the second case, no doubt the person was demanding for permanent injunction, but this injunction can come into effect only after passing the decision by court in favor of this. There is no certain time period within which the decision has to be passed. Hence, till the passing of decision, his neighbour can encroach his land and even make a wall on his land. So, there is need to restrain the neighbour till final judgement of the court comes in this regard. This can be done by passing the temporary injunction on the neighbour restraining him to encroach the land of plaintiff till the final decision is passed in this case.
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 requisite acts.
“To Compel, Command or Order some person to do something”
Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 states that “Nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affect the inherent power of the Court to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the Court.” In parallel to this inherent power, there lies another section which is Section 94 stating about “Supplemental Proceedings”. It provides a lot of provisions to the court in order to prevent the ends of Justice from being defeated. Many provisions are provided in this section but the most important is to make such other interlocutory orders, as may appear to the Court to be just and convenient.