Injunction Orders to Prevent Work: A Comprehensive Legal Guide

It is interesting to observe that the first respondent did not visit the work himself to see what stage had been" reached and whether compliance could be made with the order of the Court. ... As regards the contempt of court alleged to have been committed by the first respondent the sole question is whether work contrary to the order of Court was done subsequent to the receipt of the telegram. An injunction operates from the date of the #HL_S....

2024 0 Supreme(Bom) 1079

It was further submitted that merely because the applicant had taken resort to remedies available to challenge the interim injunction order dated 15.06.2015, it could not be said that the development work was hampered. ... It was emphasized that the finances of the sister concerns of the plaintiff company can be said to be healthy and therefore, at this stage, the said aspect of finances could not be gone into while examining as to whether the order of interim #HL_STA....

2025 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 8584

The petitioner filed a written reply taking a preliminary objection that the application under Order XXI Rule 32 CPC was not maintainable as no decree, injunction or executable order existed in favour of the Gram Panchayat. ... The facts, in brief, as borne out from the impugned order and the record, are that the respondent–Gram Panchayat had earlier instituted a civil suit for permanent injunction restraining the present petitioner from storing “Haddo Rora” and from carrying on the #....

2023 0 Supreme(Kar) 313

has committed an error in granting an order of injunction when the appeal is pending and whether the cause of action is different in the present suit? ... suit and seek for an order of injunction. ... It is nothing but suppressing the truth, the plaintiffs/respondents have obtained an order of injunction stating that this Court has refused to grant an order of injunction and also relief sought is very clear that defendants/appellant....

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ori) 5247

Undoubtedly, creation of disturbance by the defendants in the construction work would amount to violation of the order of injunction but then, the question that needs to be answered is whether the provision would be sufficient as a remedy. ... The trial Court also referred to the work order issued by the BDO in favour of the plaintiff and observed that if the half-constructed house remains in that stage, it will not be beneficial to either party. ... Coming to the imp....

of the Crown, yet the servants who commit it, whether spontaneously or by order of a superior power, are answerable therefor in an ordinary action, for the civil irresponsibility of the superior power for tortious acts could not be maintained with any show of justice if its agents were not personally ... Mohamed denied the existence of a supposed rule that the Crown cannot be interfered with in its work, for if that were the case, he submitted, no injunction could issue against ....

Court of Appeal Putrajaya

an extent sufficient for the Court to be minded to order injunction sought. ... Appeals 579 And 581 - Enclosures 1 And 3 Issue (i) - Whether The Court Can Order Declarations And/Or Damages Under Section 11(1) AA 2005? ... According to the HCJ if not for the Arrangement, the Plaintiff would have been entitled to seek for a release of the BG (APG) from the Defendant. Thirdly, the Defendant refused to issue Work Done Certificates for work for Milestones 10 and 11 and ha....

High Court Malaya Penang

It did not involve a re-litigation of the same issues that had been decided in connection with the Injunction. Thus, the decision and findings pertaining to the Injunction has no impact, let alone any finality, in relation to the Prohibitory Order. ... After consultation with her architect, D alleges it was discovered that the construction work done was not in tandem with the progress billing. D asserts that P is in breach of contract for not completing the house on t....

an extent sufficient for the court to be minded to order injunction sought. ... Although the HCJ did make such ruling on unconscionability, the said ruling/order was subsequently set aside by the HCJ having acknowledged the position that the court was not empowered to rule/order as such then. ... According to the HCJ if not for the arrangement, the plaintiff would have been entitled to seek for a release of the BG (APG) from the defendant. Thirdly, the defendant refused to issue #HL_ST....

2023 0 Supreme(Del) 133

the Respondent/ Plaintiff original artistic work of a lehenga. ... He also states that the impugned order has not only jeopardized the entire business of the Appellant, as the appellant had made the lehengas on order but has also ‘jeopardized some marriages’ as the orders have been placed by ladies who are to get married or who have to attend the marriage. ... Present appeals have been filed challenging the ex-parte injunction order dated 10th January, 2023 passed by the learned Distri....

2017 0 Supreme(Del) 4759

As noted above, initial exploration period expired on 14.10.2014 and the extended period also expired on 14.04.2015. As far as the letters of Garm Panchayats are concerned, these are also starting from the period of 2014 and barring such letters, nothing has been filed by the petitioner on record to show if the petitioner had taken any other steps in light of any such purported agitation or resistance from the villagers. Therefore, during initial period there was no order of injunction passed restraining the respondent from executing the work. Even during the extended perio....

2017 0 Supreme(Cal) 596

In any event, the order of injunction precluded the work being completed by another agency. There does not appear to have been any evidence of such work being undertaken by any other agency.

1996 0 Supreme(Del) 408

Work has already been awarded on 10th January, 1996 even before the filing of the suit and a final contract has come into existence and, in my opinion, therefore, it will not be proper to pass any order of injunction in favour of the plaintiff. ( 17 ) FOR all the above reasons, the application of the plaintiff is dismissed. It is not a case of two rival competitors who are trying to project their own personal image or are trying to derive benefits for the personal gains, but it is a project which will be in national interest and the same cannot be allowed to be stopped at a....

1995 0 Supreme(Mad) 989

The building was not occupied by anybody when the injunction was granted. Instead of doing it, they have taken the law in their hands and violated the order and now contend that it cannot be the intention of the court that the building should, remain unoccupied. If the respondents wanted to complete the work so as to enable them to make the building suitable for occupation, they ought to have come forward with an application for vacating the injunction and get an order. The injunction order is to the effect that they should not carry out any work of any nature.

1991 0 Supreme(Cal) 388

( 8 ) UPON perusal of the materials on record, and considering the lengthy submission made on behalf of the respective parties, this Court finds that the respondent authorities have taken up the impugned decision to Award the contract in favour of the added party. But this Court is prima facie satisfied that any order of injunction should not stand in the way to assume the work of the project. Considering further, this Court is of the view that the matter requires indepth and consideration of further details to adjudicate the claim and counter-claim of both sides. Upon due ....