JUDGMENT :

1. Heard the learned senior counsel and other counsel for the parties. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

Introduction:

2. In a suit for a permanent injunction, the plaintiffs fail to get an interim injunction. But they succeed in the Miscellaneous Civil Appeal. So one of the defendants has filed this writ petition. It assails the appellate order on the grounds that it has interfered with the trial Court's judicious exercise of discretion. The respondents 1 to 3, that is the plaintiffs, argue that they have established all the three cardinal principles to earn injunction, but the trial Court has erred on that count. So the Appellate Court has corrected the mistake; it has merely preserved the disputed commodity pending the litigation.

3. Who should this equitable remedy favour? After all, can this Court interfere with an Appellate Court’s order on the premise that it views the matter in a different light—even in a better light?

Facts:

4. The first three respondents are the plaintiffs in Commercial Suit No.23 of 2020 before the Commercial Court, North Goa, at Panaji; they all are private limited companies. The w