PATHERYA, RAJASEKHAR MANTHA
Shanti Dey @ Santi Dey – Appellant
Versus
Suvodeep Saha – Respondent
1. This appeal has been filed from the order dated 16th August, 2016. By the said order the application filed under Section 9 of the 1996 Act filed by the appellant was dismissed and the interim order passed was vacated. The application filed under Section 9 of the 1996 Act was filed in April, 2014 and since the interim order was passed it was continued. It is only by virtue of the order dated 16th August, 2016 that this interim measure and the order of injunction passed was vacated. Section 11 of the 1996 Act was filed on 24th March, 2016 and is pending.
2. The only reason for vacating the order of temporary injunction by the Court below is that in case the injunction is granted or continued commercial transaction will be seriously hampered and the project will be interrupted which will escalate the project cost. Another reason for having passing the order dated 16th August, 2016, as the court below relied on the balance of convenience and inconvenience and according to the Court below the appellant would be adequately compensated by an order of damage or loss and this can be measured by money. This reason cannot be sustained prima facie at the moment as the partnership f
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.