SC Issues Notice As To Whether A Defendant Can Seek Injunction In A Suit Filed By Plaintiff Under Order 39 Rule 1 CPC

Background

• The name of the case was Tamminedi Ramakrishna v. N. Jayalakshmi.
• The plaintiffs had filed a suit against the defendant since the defendant was not ready to execute the sale deed.
• The defendant had filed applications under Order 39 Rule 1 (a) (b) and (c) r/w Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code.
• The defendants filed the applications seeking a restraint on the alienation of property while the suits are disposed.
• The Trial Court had allowed the temporary injunction.
• The appeal against the order was dismissed by the Karnataka High Court.
• The Supreme Court has issued a notice on the issue whether the defendant can file an injunction under Order XXXIX of the CPC.

Kerala High Court

• The case referred to was Vincent v. Aisumma.
• On applications filed by the defendants, Order 39 Rule 1 allows for the entry of prohibitory or mandatory injunctions.
• An order of injunction can be issued either against the defendant or against the plaintiff, according to Rule 1.
• The purpose of establishing the Rules in Order 39 is to put an end to the wrongdoing that has been reported and to maintain the status quo while the case is pending.

Patna High Court

• The case considered was Indrawati Devi v. Bulu Ghosh.
• An interlocutory obligatory injunction can be sought by a defendant.
• In the exercise of its inherent powers, the Court may grant a temporary injunction in unusual situations not covered by Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC.

Calcutta High Court

• The case in question was Dr. Ashish Ranjan Dass v. Rajendra Nath Mullick.
• It was held that since the defendant's claim was incidental to the plaintiff's relief, the temporary injunction was granted.
• Karnataka High Court
• The case in question was Suganda Bai v. Sulu Bai.
• It was stated that in circumstances where the defendant's claim to relief arises out of or is related to the plaintiff's cause of action, he might seek a temporary restraining order against the plaintiff.

What do you think of the defendant’s right to seek injunction under Order 39? Tell us in the comments section below!