Important Point
It is one thing to conclude that the trial Court has not recorded its prima facie satisfaction on merits but granted the temporary injunction and it is another thing to hold that trial Court has gone wrong in recording the prima facie satisfac­tion and setting aside that finding on the basis of the material on record because it has not considered the relevant material or because it has erroneously reached the finding or conclusions on the facts established. In the first situation, the appellate court will be justified in upsetting the order under appeal even without going into the merits of the case but in the second eventuality, it cannot set aside the impugned order without discussing the material on record and recording a contrary finding.

Judgment

Quadri, J.-Leave is granted.

2. The appeal is directed against order of the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court in FMAT No. 438 of 1998 dated 18th September, 1998. The plaintiff in the suit, out of which this appeal arises, is the appellant.

3. The appellant is a society, registered under the Societies Regis­tration Act, established some time in 1916 by certain families of Jain community for preservation of its culture, heritage, religious philos­ophy etc. and for imparting modern commercial, physical and religious education according to the tenets of Jain Swetambar Terapanthi reli­gion to the children of the community (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Society’). There is also another organisation of the Jains, namely Jain Swetambar Terapanthi Mahasabha, of the same religious community. These two are rival organisations. In this appeal, we are concerned with the Society which is managing four schools-three Girls schools and one Boys school.

4. The Society appointed Phundan Singh (Respondent No. 1) as Headmas­ter of the Boys school in 1993. The executive committee which is now running the Society was voted to office and accordingly it assumed charge on December 24, 1994. On October 3, 1995, Respondent No. 1 attained the age of superannuation, sixty years, but by a resolution of Joint Meeting of Executive Committee and Board of Trustees, his services were extended for a period of one year. Again, on October 4, 1996, the services of the first respondent were extended for a second term of one year expiring on October 3, 1997.

5. On the allegation that Respondents No. 2, 4 to 6 and some others were indulging in activities harmful to the Society as well as the school, their membership was terminated by a resolution adopted by the Society on July 13, 1996. It appears that six suits were filed chal­lenging the resolution terminating the membership and out of them suits filed by Respondent No. 2 and others were dis­missed; the suit filed by the fourth respondent is pending.

6. While so, on April 26, 1997, the first respondent was served with the order of termination of his services on the ground that he joined the camp of the expelled members and that on April 25, 1997 he tres­passed criminally in the Boys school premises along with members of Mahasabha, broke open padlocks of Conference Room and other rooms and took away some important documents, valuable records, etc. of the Society. It is also mentioned that the said records etc. were recov­ered from the rooms of the rival organisation.

7. The third respondent who was appointed as the Teacher in-charge of the Boys school faced difficulties in running the school on account of the alleged interference of the first respondent and others, so he filed a Title Suit No. 1197 of 1997 against the said persons and sought injunction restraining them from interfering in the functioning and the administration of the Boys school on 9th May, 1997. Though the Division Bench set aside that order on technical ground, yet it was restored after remand by the trial Court on November 29, 1997.

8. The Society also filed Title Suit No. 1779 of 1997 in the court of second Judge, City Civil Court, Calcutta against the respondents herein claiming, inter alia, declaration that the first respondent ceased to be the Assistant Teacher and Headmaster of the Boys school; that Respondents No. 2 and 4 to 6 ceased to be the members of the Society; and the fifth respondent ceased to be the member of the Executive Committee of the Society. It also sought temporary injunc­tion restraining them from entering into school premises and causing any interference in the functioning of the school. On January 29, 1998, the trial Court granted the injunction sought for by the Socie­ty. The respondents filed the appeal against that order. On 18th September, 1998, a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court set aside the order of injunction granted by the Civil Court, appointed two Joint Administrators in place of the Society’