JUDGMENT

Suriyadi Halim Omar JCA:

[1] The panel allowed this appeal with costs and we had accordingly set aside the interim injunction order granted by the High Court on 7 November 2008.

[2] At the outset, it must be clarified that with the High Court order being interim in nature, much of our focus was directed on such type of injunctions, though touching on some aspect of permanent injunctions against the Government, its departments and servants was inevitable. It is quite established now that we were merely to review the decision of the learned judge and conclude whether he had correctly applied all the right principles when meting down the interim injunction. It is not incumbent upon us to substitute his decision premised on the ground that we would have arrived at a different finding, had we been in his shoes, subject to him having correctly adhered to all the established legal principles. If either he has committed an error in law, misconceived the facts, not giving sufficient weight to relevant matters but taking into account irrelevant ones or the decision would result in injustice, it then becomes incumbent upon us to set that order aside (Vijayalakshmi Devi Nachatiram