The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to balance irreparable injury and convenience when granting interlocutory injunctions, and the requirement for courts to consider the effect of the injunction on the status quo during the pendency of the litigation.

1. This is a petition to revise the order of the District Judge, of Ernakulam in C.M.A. No. 42 of 1957 confirming the order of the District Munsiff of Ernakulam in I.A.No.3621 of 1957 in O.S. No. 547 issuing a temporary injunction.

2. To the north of the Y.W.C.A. compound in this town there are three plots of land bearing the Survey Nos. 502/1, 502/6 and 502/2. They range from east to west, survey No. 502/1 being the easternmost plot and survey No. 502/2 being the westernmost plot. Somewhat to the north-west of survey No. 502/2 there is another plot bearing the survey No. 502/5. Between survey No. 502/5 and the Y.W.C.A. compound there is a small arm of survey No. 502/2 which forms an outlet or way from survey No. 502/2 to the Chittoor road. To the north of survey Nos. 502/5,502/2 and 502/6 there is a lane running eastwards from the Chittoor road and ending of the north-west corner of survey No. 502/1. Survey No. 502/4 lies north of this lane, abreast of survey Nos. 502/2 and 502/5. Survey Nos. 502/1 and 502/6 belong to the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 547 of 1957, and survey No. 502/4 is the compound in which their tarwad house is situated. Defendant 3 is the owner of survey No. 502/2 and defendant 4 is her husband.

3. This suit, O. S.547 of 1957, was brought on the allegation that the lane to the north of survey Nos. 502/5, 502/2 and 502/6 belongs to the plaintiffs and is their private property and that the defendants were trespassing upon it. Plaintiffs prayed for a declaration of their title in respect of the lane and for a permanent injunction to restrain the defendants from trespassing upon and making use of it. Their case was that the defendant's way to survey No. 502/2 from Chittoor road was along the arm of that survey number lying between survey No. 502/5 and the Y.W.C.A. compound. Pending the suit plaintiffs also asked for a temporary injunction to restrain the defendants from trespassing upon the lane and making use of it. Defendants 3 and 4 opposed the application for temporary injunction contending that the lane in question was not a private lane but a public pathway and that even if it was originally a private pathway they had perfected the right to use it by prescription. According to them, they have been using it even before the revenue settlement in the Cochin State which, it was stated before me, was between the years 1079 and 1081 M.E.

4. Ext. P3, the settlement register, shows that the disputed land is a lane which was registered in the name of the late Sri Marayil Krishna Menon, the kamavan of the plaintiffs' tarwad and Ext. P4 shows that Sri Marayil Krishna Menon had executed a will directing that this lane should be used as a common pathway by the members of his tarwad. Relying mainly on these two documents, the learned District Munsiff found that the plaintiffs had a prima facie case as regards title; and acting on the commission report in the case he also held that the defendants were making use of the lane only during the recent times. On the strength of these findings he allowed the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction, and his order was confirmed on appeal by the District Judge. Defendants 3 and 4, therefore, filed this revision petition.

5. In view of Ext. P3 the correctness of the finding of the lower courts that the plaintiffs have a prima facie case as regards title cannot be disputed. Nevertheless, I do not consider that their orders allowing the plaintiff's application for injunction are sustainable. The principles which should guide courts in dealing with applications for interlocutory injunctions are stated as follows in Joshi's Easements and Licences,

page 211 and 212(1957 Edition).

"An interlocutory injunction of a mandatory character can only be granted if the court is satisfied that the matter is an emergent one and immediate assistance is needed to prevent 'irremediable injury' being done to the legal or equitable rights Of the claimant. Ordinarily, courts are very slow in g