The court emphasized the necessity of assessing the prima facie case and balance of convenience in granting ad-interim injunctions, highlighting procedural adherence in lower courts.

JUDGMENT :

Shampa Sarkar, J.

1. The revisional application arises out of an order dated January 7, 2023 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 7th Court at Alipore, in Misc. Appeal No.378 of 2022. The Misc. Appeal arose out of an order dated November 17, 2022 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) 3rd Court at Alipore in Title Suit No.1780 of 2022.

2. By the order impugned, the learned lower appellate court allowed the Misc. Appeal on contest. The order of refusal of the prayer for ad-interim injunction passed on November 17, 2022 by the learned Trial Judge, was set aside. By an order of temporary injunction, the petitioners as also the respondent No.3 in the Misc. Appeal, their men, agents and other associates were restrained from disturbing the plaintiffs/opposite parties in the matter of functioning of the newly appointed Central Office Bearers (for short “COB”) in the Bi-ennial General Meeting (for short “BGM”) of the South Eastern Railway Men’s Union (for short SERMU) dated September 11, 2022 and September 12, 2022, communicated to the railway authorities on September 14, 2022, till the disposal of the Title Suit No.1780 of 2022. The railway authorities were allowed to continue with the final publication of the list of COB in connection with the said BGM. The order was passed, subject to any order of stay in respect of publication of the list of COB members by the High Court or any other Hon’ble Court in the pending contempt proceeding.

3. The opposite parties were directed to submit statement of accounts of the union from time to time before the learned trial court as and when called for by the learned Court. It was made clear that all points were left open to be decided by the trial court at the time of disposal of the suit, without being influenced by the order of the learned lower appellate court.

4. Mr. Soumya Majumder, learned Advocate who appeared on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the order impugned amounted to allowing the main relief in the suit. That the plaintiff/opposite party No.1 had been removed by a proper resolution of the Board. Neither the suit nor the Misc. Appeal was maintainable at his instance. That the injunction application which was pending before the learned trial court was rendered infructuous. The learned lower appellate court ought to have disposed of the Misc. Appeal only on the question as to whether an ad-interim order of injunction should to have been passed on the basis of the plaint case. Instead of doing so, the learned lower appellate court decided the entire injunction application. The impugned order was beyond the scope of the Misc. Appeal. Referring to an order dated March 2, 2022, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 3rd Additional Court at Alipore in Title Suit No.286 of 2022, Mr. Majumder submitted that the learned lower appellate court failed to take into consideration that a competent court, had already directed the parties to maintain status quo in respect of possession, nature, character and activities of SERMU. The opposite party No.1 and one Gautam Mukherjee were restrained from interfering with the functioning of SERMU. The petitioners were plaintiff Nos.2 and 3 in the suit. The said interim order of status quo was extended from time to time. In the present suit(T.S.1780 of 2022), the learned trial judge refused the ad-interim order of injunction which was prayed for by the plaintiffs/opposite parties upon considering the earlier order of status quo passed in Title Suit No.286 of 2022. The learned trial judge concluded that considering the entire f