2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 31700

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. NATARAJAN, J
CHANDRADAS, PRADEEPLAL, BINU, ROBIN, MURALIDHARAN – Appellant
Versus
SREE NARAYANA SAMSKARIKA SAMITHY KARTHIKAPPALLY THALUK UNIT – Respondent
OP(C) NO. 1420 OF 2025 | OS NO. 27 OF 2025

The court emphasized that applications for ad-interim injunction must be resolved within 30 days as per CPC guidelines to ensure timely justice.

Headnote:(A) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order 39 Rule 3 A - Ad-interim injunctions - The trial court is required to dispose of an application for confirming or vacating an ad-interim injunction within 30 days of its grant if notice has not been issued to the defendant - The court emphasized timely resolution is key, especially in injunction matters. (Paras 4, 5, 6)

(B) Civil Procedure - Timeliness - The trial court's adjournment of proceedings rather than promptly addressing the injunction application contrary to the procedural mandate is a procedural lapse that impedes the defendants' rights. (Paras 6)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners contend that previous applications for injunction in prior suits were ignored, leading to a new suit where an ad-interim injunction was improperly obtained.

Findings of Court:
The Sub Court, Mavelikkara is directed to dispose of IA No.1 of 2025 within 2 weeks, adhering to CPC rules.

Issues: The core issue was the lack of timely disposal by the lower court as mandated by procedural rules regarding ad-interim injunctions.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated the necessity for adherence to procedural timelines established in the CPC, highlighting the significance of timely judicial intervention in injunction matters.

Result: The petition is allowed.