Back
DIVYESH A. JOSHI
Pankaj Krishnadev Mashruwala – Appellant
Versus
Aswinkumar Natvarlal Jadav – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. With the consent of learned advocates for the parties and considering the issue involved in the matter, the present Appeal from Order is taken up for final disposal.
2. By filing present Appeal from Order under Section 104 and Order 43, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as “the CPC” for short), the appellant has challenged the validity and legality of the order dated 19.10.2024 passed below application for notice of motion, Exhs.6 & 7 by the learned Chamber Judge, Court No.14, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad in Civil Suit No.328/2024, whereby the application preferred by the original plaintiff came to be allowed.
3. Heard learned advocate, Mr. D.K. Puj for the appellants and learned advocate, Mr. Vivek Bhamare for the respondent.
4. Learned advocate, Mr. Puj submitted that the appellants herein are the original defendants in the suit being Civil Suit No.328/2024 preferring by the respondent herein, who are original plaintiff. He submitted that the suit was filed for the recovery of the amount of Rs.16,20,000/- from the original defendants. He referred to the facts of the case as mentioned in the plaint and submitted that it is the specific c
An appellate court may interfere with a trial court's injunction order if the essential ingredients of prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable loss are not established by the plaint....
A plaintiff's delay in filing a suit impacts the entitlement to injunction and specific performance, as timely prosecution and adherence to evidential requirements are essential for equitable relief.
To obtain a temporary injunction, a plaintiff must demonstrate a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and potential for irreparable harm, without conducting a mini trial.
The appellate court must respect the trial court's discretion in granting injunctions unless shown to be arbitrary or perverse, emphasizing the need for careful scrutiny of such orders.
The appellate court must respect the trial court's discretion in granting injunctions unless shown to be arbitrary or perverse.
An order refusing an interim injunction is not a judgment under the Letters Patent, hence no appeal lies from such an order.
The court emphasized that failure to demonstrate readiness and willingness to perform contractual obligations justifies the denial of interim injunctions in specific performance cases.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
