The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the petitioner to establish a prima facie case, sustaining of irreparable loss and injury, and the balance of convenience leaning in petitioner's favor for the application of temporary injunction.

ORDER

P.K. Tripathy, J. - This Civil Revision is directed against the judgment dated 25.3.2000 in Misc. Appeal No. 1 1/24 of 2000 of the Court of Second Addl. District Judge, Bhubaneswar. Respondent before the Court below is the petitioner in this revision.

2. Petitioner is a Co-operative Society constituted by a group of officers of the State Bank of India (in short 'S.B.I.) working within the State of Orissa who are not members of any other Co-operative Society or any other associations in the State as per their by-law, a copy of which has been placed for perusal by the learned counsel for the petitioner. When the Head Office of the S.B.I, was functioning at Forest Park and IDCO Tower the plaintiff-society was allowed accommodation within the Bank premises to run its office. The dispute arose when the Head Office was shifted to its own building without providing any accommodation to the plaintiff-society. Thus, the plaintiff-petitioner instituted T.S. No. 53 of 2000 in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bhubaneswar praying for the declaration which in essence is to the effect that it be declared that the plaintiff-Society is entitled to an accommodation in the new building at Unit-III, Bhubaneswar and the defendant/opposite party members i.e. the Bank and its Assistant General Manager he injuncted not to withhold such accommodation and not to shift to the new building in Unit-III until providing such accommodation to the plaintiff-Society. Along with the suit application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, CPC (in short C.P.C.).was filed and registered as Misc. Case No. 52 of 2000. The opposite party members contested the prayer for interim injunction, inter alia; on the ground of absence of a prirnajacie case, balance of convenience and no irreparable loss and injury. It was also stated by them that compassionate accommodation granted to the petitioner at Forest Park and IDCO Tower cannot be regarded as a substantial right to claim accommodation when the petitioner-society is not an integral part of the Bank. It was also stated by the opposite parties that grant of ad interim injunction will result in premature disposal of the suit.

3. After hearing the parties learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) allowed the application and passed the order in the following manner :

".......The opposite parties are directed to provide a room for occupation of the petitioner's society in the newly constructed building with the local Head Office having regard to the precedent as adopted by the Bank."

The opposite party challenged the said order and vide the impugned judgment in Misc. Appeal No. 11/24 of 2000 learned Second Addl. District Judge set aside the above quoted order on the ground of non-existence of a prima facie case in favour of the plaintiff/ petitioner and also on the grounds that a case of irreparable loss and injury and balance of convenience being not made out by the petitioner. The appellate Court also recorded that in the absence of a subsisting legal-right .and under the given facts and circumstances petitioner is not entitled to the interim relief of mandatory injunction which will tantamount to grant of the relief which they have claimed in the suit. Accordingly, the appellate Court vacated the order of injunction. In course of hearing of the appeal an application under Order 41, Rule 27, C.P.C. filed by the appellant regarding the petitioner-society functioning in another building was taken into consideration as well.

4. At the conclusion of argument in xxxxxxx this Court petitioner files an affidavit counteracting to the contention in that additional evidence.

5. It is not disputed at the Bar that to consider the prayer of ad interim injunction the party who is seeking such relief has to satisfy the Court regarding existence of a prima facie case, sustaining of irreparable loss and injury if the interim relief is not granted and the balance of convenience leaning in petitioner's favour.

6. Learned counsel for the petitio