aConsequences of non-disposal of injunction application on merits within 30 days from the date of grant of ex parte ad interim injunction
Venkatasubbiah Naidu vs. S. Chellappan,
When an ex parte temporary injunction is granted by a judicial officer under order 39 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Code but he fails to dispose of the temporary injunction application on merits within 30 days from the date of grant of ex parte temporary injunction, the aggrieved party shall be entitled to right of appeal notwithstanding the pendency of the application for grant or vacation of the temporary injunction, against the order remaining in force. The appellate court shall, then, be obliged to take note of the omission of the subordinate court in complying with the provisions of the Order 39 Rule 3-A of the Civil Procedure Code. In appropriate cases, the appellate court, apart from granting or vacating or modifying the order of such injunction, may suggest suitable action against the erring judicial officer, including recommendation to take steps for making adverse entry in his ACR. Failure to decide the injunction application or to vacate the ex parte temporary injunction shall, for the purpose of the appeal, be deemed to be the final order passed on the application for temporary injunction on the date of expiry of 30 days mentioned in Rule 3-A.
Effect of non-compliance with the proviso to Order 39 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Code
Venkatasubbiah Naidu vs. S. Chellappan
If a party, in whose favour an order was passed ex parte, fails to comply with the duties which he has to perform as required by the proviso to Rule 3 of Order 39 of the Civil Procedure Code, he must take the risk. Non-compliance with such requisites on his part cannot be allowed to go without any consequence and to enable him to have only the advantage of it. The consequence of the party (who secured the order) for not complying with the duties he is required to perform is that he cannot be allowed to take advantage of such order if the order is not obeyed by the other party. A disobedient beneficiary of the order cannot be heard to complain against any disobedience alleged against another party.
Interim injunction or stay against Govt. regarding-
BALCO employees Union vs. Union of India
- Public policy
- Economic policy
- Public schemes
- Public projects etc.
No ex-parte relief by way of injunction or stay especially with respect to public projects, public schemes or economic policies or schemes of Govt. should be granted unless there is likelihood of irreparable damage.