AI Overview...
- O 39 R 1 and 2 Prohibitory Injunction Against an Accomplished Act
-
Main points and insights:
- These rules provide that a prohibitory injunction cannot be granted to restrain an act that has already been completed or accomplished. Once the act is done, the court generally considers the injunction application infructuous (e.g., PARKASH KAUR VS K. G. RINGSHIA - Delhi, Sundru Devi VS Shanti Devi - Himachal Pradesh).
- The communication of an act or event after its occurrence (e.g., a letter confirming cancellation or completion) does not constitute a cause of action that can be restrained by injunction (e.g., PARKASH KAUR VS K. G. RINGSHIA - Delhi).
- Courts emphasize that prohibitory injunctions are meant to prevent future acts, not to undo or restrain acts already performed.
- In cases involving wrongful acts or errors, courts may consider restitution or other remedies rather than prohibitory injunctions if the act has already been completed (e.g., DTC VS INTERNATIONAL AVENUES - Delhi, PARKASH KAUR VS K. G. RINGSHIA - Delhi).
- Ex parte injunctions, once the act is accomplished, tend to be vacated or considered infructuous, as the primary purpose of preventing the act is no longer applicable (Sundru Devi VS Shanti Devi - Himachal Pradesh, PARKASH KAUR VS K. G. RINGSHIA - Delhi).
-
Analysis and Conclusion:
- The principles under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code establish that prohibitory injunctions are designed to prevent future acts and are not applicable to acts already completed.
- Courts generally refuse to grant injunctions to restrain acts that have been fully carried out, emphasizing the importance of timely relief.
- When acts are already accomplished, courts may consider alternative remedies such as restitution or declare the act null and void if applicable, but prohibitory injunctions are typically not granted post hoc.
- These principles ensure that injunctions serve their preventive purpose and are not used as punitive measures for acts already performed.
Search Results for "O 39 R 1 and 2 Prohibitory Injunction against the Act Already Accomplished"
1997 0 Supreme(Del) 1004 • India - Delhi
J.B.GOEL
{'KEYWORD': 'Territorial Jurisdiction', 'SUBJECT': 'Civil Procedure Code, 1908', 'ACT SECTION LIST': ['Section 16', 'Section 20 ... This letter merely communicated what had already happened, that is, the agreement had already been cancelled at Bombay. ... Interim order is vacated and the application for injunction stands disposed of as infructuous. ... ... Letter dated 20. 11. 84 communicating the factum of an accomplished cause of action does not form an integral part of the cause of action. ... Where....
2009 0 Supreme(Del) 716 • India - Delhi
VALMIKI J.MEHTA, MUKUL MUDGAL
licence fees for the period it enjoyed the benefit of displaying its advertisements which it did not pay by virtue of the ex parte injunction ... of the court being wrongful or a mistake or error committed by the court - Injury, if any, caused by the act of the court shall ... judgment of a court if such order/judgment is ultimately not sustained - The factor attracting applicability of restitution is not the act ... We are not concerned whether the prohibitory orders issued by the Income-tax Department were valid or not....
2013 1 Supreme 466 • India - Supreme Court
T.S.THAKUR, GYAN SUDHA MISRA
(a) Limitation Act, 1963 - Schedule - Articles 57 and ; (2007) 5 SCC 211; (1997) 1 SCC 9; (1996) 1 SCC ... (Para 26) ... (1956) 1 All ER 855; (2011) 3 SCC ... Pushpa Pramod Shah for a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining defendant No.2-lessee of the plot, her agents, servants and representatives from interfering with the plaintiff’s possession over the plot in dispute. ... 1980 for permanent prohibitory injunction could and....
2018 0 Supreme(HP) 1317 • India - Himachal Pradesh
TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN
Fact of the Case: The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of ancestral land and sought a permanent prohibitory injunction ... A decree for permanent prohibitory injunction was sought restraining interference from the present defendants. 3. ... and 2 / defendants No. 1 and 2, therefore, the sale deed dated 17.07.2006 executed by Paras Ram was declared null and void. ... If in a given case, ex parte injunction is granted, then the said applicatio....
2009 0 Supreme(Del) 282 • India - Delhi
VALMIKI J.MEHTA, MUKUL MUDGAL
licence fees for the period it enjoyed the benefit of displaying its advertisements which it did not pay by virtue of the ex parte injunction ... of the court being wrongful or a mistake or error committed by the court - Injury, if any, caused by the act of the court shall ... judgment of a court if such order/judgment is ultimately not sustained - The factor attracting applicability of restitution is not the act ... We are not concerned whether the prohibitory orders issued by the Income-tax Department were valid or not....
2009 0 Supreme(Kar) 743 • India - Karnataka
D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR, L.NARAYANA SWAMY
COMPANIES ACT, 1956 - Sections 111A & 206A: [D.V. Shylendra Kumar & L. ... Application under - Share-holder seeking redressal of his claim before Consumer Forum - Provisions of Sections 14 and 5 of Limitation Act ... ... 39. ... The sub-broker at Mysore and the company were initially arrayed as respondents 1 and 2 to this complaint, praying for the two reliefs as under: ... 1. ... These facts we have already noticed to some extent in the earlier part of this Judgem....
2017 Supreme(Online)(KER) 51220 • India - High Court of Kerala
K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J
Fact of the Case: The plaintiffs sought a prohibitory injunction against defendants who attempted to obstruct the drainage ... Easement - Permanent Injunction - Easements Act Section 15, Limitation Act Section 14 - The court held that the plaintiffs proved ... Issues: Whether the plaintiffs' suit for easement was barred under the Easements Act and Limitation Act, the admissibility ... and prohibitory injunction against the defend....
2020 0 Supreme(Mad) 417 • India - Madras
A.P.SAHI, SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
Act in Section Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation Act and Section Madurai City Municipal Corporation Act - Amendment was published ... - Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920 - Section 285-A - Madurai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1971 - Section 410-A - Tamil ... of Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act which are similar to amendments brought about same ... The task of construing important Constitutional provisions l....
1994 0 Supreme(Mad) 1101 • India - Madras
S.S.SUBRAMANI
Tamilnadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973-Sections 23, 24 and 54-Bar of jurisdiction of Civil Court-Plaintiff working ... In effect, the second defendant was allowed to continue in service, but a prohibitory direction was given against the 1 st defendant- management from relieving the plaintiff. ... 13. Against the judgment, the plaintiff did not prefer an appeal. ... ... .(4) When a provision is already declared unconstitutional or the constitutionality of any provision is to be challenged, a suit ....
2025 0 Supreme(All) 3086 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
jurisdiction to adjudicate the suit for injunction as the land was not agricultural under Section 94 of the U.P. ... 94, 95, and 206 - Petition challenging the dismissal of application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC regarding a suit for permanent injunction ... (A) Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021 - Section 14 - U.P. ... Rex AIR 1949 Allahabad 564, wherein a distinction was drawn between the trespasser in the process of acquiring possession and the trespasser who had already accomplishe....
Filter by Legal Phrase
