Back
H. P. SANDESH
Bowring Institute – Appellant
Versus
Sarwik S. – Respondent
JUDGMENT (CAV)
This miscellaneous first appeal is filed challenging the order dated 22.11.2024 passed on I.A.No.1 in O.S.No.8292/2024 by the 41st Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru granting the temporary injunction restraining the appellant from passing any orders based on the resolution dated 25.10.2024 in respect of removal of the plaintiff from the membership of defendant No.1 till the next date of hearing.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.
3. The factual matrix of the case of the plaintiff/respondent No.1 before the Trial Court is that the plaintiff is the permanent life member of the defendants Bowring Institute and the plaintiff visited the defendant Bowring Institute on 18.07.2024 along with his friend as a Guest to enjoy the privileges of defendant Institute and he being the permanent member of the defendant Institute used the swimming pool at about 11.45 p.m. by inadvertently and without knowledge of the plaintiff that he should not use the swimming pool at late night. The security guard and other members of the defendant’s Institute scolded the plaintiff saying that the plaintiff should not use the swimming pool during res
Temporary injunction – When ex-parte temporary injunction is granted, defendant has right to file application under Order 39 Rule 4 of CPC and seek for vacating the same.
The court emphasized that an ex-parte temporary injunction must comply with Order 39 Rule 3 of CPC, requiring the court to assign reasons for its decision, failing which the order is liable to be set....
Non-compliance with statutory requirements for an ex parte injunction renders the order invalid, emphasizing the need for adherence to procedural mandates.
The failure to record reasons for granting an ex-parte injunction without notice constitutes a jurisdictional error and renders such orders unsustainable.
An appeal against an ex-parte injunction is maintainable under Order XLIII Rule 1(r), affirming that the right to appeal is a statutory right.
The court ruled that the votes required for the resolution must derive from those present at the time of voting, clarifying procedural legitimacy for future meetings.
Refusal to grant ex parte injunction is appealable; procedural adherence is vital for determining appealability under CPC.
Trial courts must evaluate and provide reasoning for injunction applications based on urgency and merits before requiring notice to the other party, as mandated by procedural rules.
The court must record reasons for granting ex-parte injunction without notice, making this requirement mandatory for valid exercise of jurisdiction.
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
