Saturday 28 July 2012

The reasons for refusal of injunction

When a judge can refuse to grant injunction

According to the provisions of section 56 of Specific Relief Act a judge can refuse to grant injunction to any party in a suit if there are reasonable grounds for that. These grounds are mentioned in Section 56 in the following manner.

Injunction when refused
56. An injunction cannot be granted-
(a) to stay a judicial proceeding pending at the institution of the suit in which the injunction is sought, unless such restraint is necessary to prevent a multiplicity of proceedings;
(b) to stay proceedings in a Court not subordinate to that from which the injunction is sought;
(c) to restraint persons from applying to any legislative body;
(d) to interfere with the public duties of any department of the Government, or with the sovereign acts of Foreign Government;
(e) to stay proceedings in any criminal matter;
(f) to prevent the breach of a contract the performance of which would not be specifically enforced;
(g) to prevent, on the ground of nuisance, an act of which it is not reasonably clear that it will be a nuisance;
(h) to prevent a continuing breach in which the applicant has acquiesced; (i) when equally efficacious relief can certainly be obtained by any other usual mode of proceeding except in case of breach of trust;
(j) when the conduct of the applicant on his agents has been such as to disentitle him to the assistance of the Court;
(k) where the applicant has no personal interest in the matter
Illustrations
(a) A seeks an injunction to restrain his partner, B, from receiving the partner-ship-debts and effects. It appears that A had improperly possessed himself of the books of the firm and refused B access to them. The Court will refuse the injunction. (b) A manufactures and sells crucibles, designating them as "patent plumbago crucibles", though, in fact, they have never been patented. B pirates the designation. A cannot obtain an injunction to restrain the piracy.
(c) A sells an article called "Mexican Balm," stating that it is compounded of divers rare essences, and has sovereign medicinal qualities. B commences to sell a similar article to which he gives a name and description such as to lead people into the belief that they are buying A's Mexican Balm. A sues B for an injunction to restrain the sale. B shows that A's Mexican Balm consists of nothing but scented hog's lard. A's use of his description is not an honest one and he cannot obtain an injunction.
Injunction to perform negative agreement

No comments:

Post a Comment

Contact Lawyers Network

If you have any queries related with this post you can contact at lawyergolra@gmail.com

Regards,
Salman Yousaf Khan
CEO
Lawyers Network
+92-333-5339880