Sec.151 - Or.39, rule 1 &2 - interim injunction - implementation of orders - Inherent powers can be invoked for granting Police Aid = When there is no specific provision of law which is sufficient to implement the order of temporary injunction or the decree for perpetual injunction granted by the court, we do not see why the provisions of Section 151 of the Code cannot be invoked for the said purpose to render justice or to redress the wrong, because, the courts should not only have the power to pass an order, but also should have the power to implement the said order. Therefore, when a party has obtained an order of temporary injunction from a court under Order 39, Rule 1 of the Code and the other party against whom the order of injunction is passed disobeys the same, the aggrieved party can certainly approach the court invoking the power of the court under Section 151 and pray for police aid for the enforcement of the order of temporary injunction. When it is brought to the notice of the court that the enforcement of the order of temporary injunction is sought to be prevented or obstructed, the court in exercise of the inherent powers under Section 151, can direct the police authorities to render all aid to the aggrieved party in the enforcement of the order of the injunction granted by the court in order to render complete justice. It must be remembered, by ordering police help to the party who has obtained an order of temporary injunction, the court merely takes the follow-up steps to implement its earlier order of injunction. In appropriate cases, where the court finds that a party who had secured an order of injunction from the court is not in a position to have its full benefit owing either to obstruction or non-co-operation of the other side, it is always open to the court to direct the police authorities to see that its order is obeyed. Admittedly, ad interim injunction orders were granted in favour of respondents on 09.04.2010 in I.A. No. 119 of 2010. Although a counter affidavit in that IA had been filed by petitioners herein in July, 2010, the said order had not been vacated. 22. I.A. No. 150 of 2011 was filed by respondents in August, 2011 alleging violation of the ad interim injunction orders. Admittedly, no counter-affidavit was filed by petitioners herein in I.A. No. 150 of 2011 in spite of several opportunities being given to them. So, the allegations made by the respondents against petitioners in I.A. No. 150 of 2011 stood uncontroverted. The respondents had even given police complaints which evoked no response from the police. Even though the order of injunction was passed in I.A. No. 119 of 2010 at an interlocutory stage, it was unambiguous and was in force for almost a year and had not been vacated. Therefore, the Court below, after waiting till 03.09.2012 (almost one year after filing of the I.A. No. 150 of 2011), was right in treating that there is no counter on behalf of the petitioners in I.A. No. 150 of 2011, that the allegations made therein were not denied. It rightly allowed it, taking notice of the urgency expressed by the respondents and their submission of interference by the petitioners in violation of the injunction order granted by the Court. Therefore, no exception can be taken to the action of the Court below in allowing I.A. No. 150 of 2011.-2015 A.P.(2014) MSKLAWREPORTS
Sec.151 - Or.39, rule 1 &2 - interim injunction - implementation of orders - Inherent powers can be invoked for granting Police Aid =
When there is no specific provision of law which is
sufficient to implement the order of temporary injunction or the
decree for perpetual injunction granted by the court, we do not see
why the provisions of Section 151 of the Code cannot be invoked for
the said purpose to render justice or to redress the wrong, because,
the courts should not only have the power to pass an order, but also
should have the power to implement the said order. Therefore, when
a party has obtained an order of temporary injunction from a court
under Order 39, Rule 1 of the Code and the other party against
whom the order of injunction is passed disobeys the same, the
aggrieved party can certainly approach the court invoking the power
of the court under Section 151 and pray for police aid for the
enforcement of the order of temporary injunction. When it is brought
to the notice of the court that the enforcement of the order of
temporary injunction is sought to be prevented or obstructed, the
court in exercise of the inherent powers under Section 151, can direct
the police authorities to render all aid to the aggrieved party in the
enforcement of the order of the injunction granted by the court in
order to render complete justice. It must be remembered, by
ordering police help to the party who has obtained an order of
temporary injunction, the court merely takes the follow-up steps to
implement its earlier order of injunction. In appropriate cases, where
the court finds that a party who had secured an order of injunction
from the court is not in a position to have its full benefit owing either
to obstruction or non-co-operation of the other side, it is always open
to the court to direct the police authorities to see that its order is
obeyed.
Admittedly, ad interim injunction orders were granted in favour
of respondents on 09.04.2010 in I.A. No. 119 of 2010. Although a
counter affidavit in that IA had been filed by petitioners herein in
July, 2010, the said order had not been vacated.
22. I.A. No. 150 of 2011 was filed by respondents in August, 2011
alleging violation of the ad interim injunction orders. Admittedly, no
counter-affidavit was filed by petitioners herein in I.A. No. 150 of
2011 in spite of several opportunities being given to them. So, the
allegations made by the respondents against petitioners in I.A. No.
150 of 2011 stood uncontroverted. The respondents had even given
police complaints which evoked no response from the police. Even
though the order of injunction was passed in I.A. No. 119 of 2010 at
an interlocutory stage, it was unambiguous and was in force for
almost a year and had not been vacated. Therefore, the Court below,
after waiting till 03.09.2012 (almost one year after filing of the I.A.
No. 150 of 2011), was right in treating that there is no counter on
behalf of the petitioners in I.A. No. 150 of 2011, that the allegations
made therein were not denied. It rightly allowed it, taking notice of
the urgency expressed by the respondents and their submission of
interference by the petitioners in violation of the injunction order
granted by the Court. Therefore, no exception can be taken to the
action of the Court below in allowing I.A. No. 150 of 2011.-2015 A.P.(2014) MSKLAWREPORTS
When there is no specific provision of law which is
sufficient to implement the order of temporary injunction or the
decree for perpetual injunction granted by the court, we do not see
why the provisions of Section 151 of the Code cannot be invoked for
the said purpose to render justice or to redress the wrong, because,
the courts should not only have the power to pass an order, but also
should have the power to implement the said order. Therefore, when
a party has obtained an order of temporary injunction from a court
under Order 39, Rule 1 of the Code and the other party against
whom the order of injunction is passed disobeys the same, the
aggrieved party can certainly approach the court invoking the power
of the court under Section 151 and pray for police aid for the
enforcement of the order of temporary injunction. When it is brought
to the notice of the court that the enforcement of the order of
temporary injunction is sought to be prevented or obstructed, the
court in exercise of the inherent powers under Section 151, can direct
the police authorities to render all aid to the aggrieved party in the
enforcement of the order of the injunction granted by the court in
order to render complete justice. It must be remembered, by
ordering police help to the party who has obtained an order of
temporary injunction, the court merely takes the follow-up steps to
implement its earlier order of injunction. In appropriate cases, where
the court finds that a party who had secured an order of injunction
from the court is not in a position to have its full benefit owing either
to obstruction or non-co-operation of the other side, it is always open
to the court to direct the police authorities to see that its order is
obeyed.
Admittedly, ad interim injunction orders were granted in favour
of respondents on 09.04.2010 in I.A. No. 119 of 2010. Although a
counter affidavit in that IA had been filed by petitioners herein in
July, 2010, the said order had not been vacated.
22. I.A. No. 150 of 2011 was filed by respondents in August, 2011
alleging violation of the ad interim injunction orders. Admittedly, no
counter-affidavit was filed by petitioners herein in I.A. No. 150 of
2011 in spite of several opportunities being given to them. So, the
allegations made by the respondents against petitioners in I.A. No.
150 of 2011 stood uncontroverted. The respondents had even given
police complaints which evoked no response from the police. Even
though the order of injunction was passed in I.A. No. 119 of 2010 at
an interlocutory stage, it was unambiguous and was in force for
almost a year and had not been vacated. Therefore, the Court below,
after waiting till 03.09.2012 (almost one year after filing of the I.A.
No. 150 of 2011), was right in treating that there is no counter on
behalf of the petitioners in I.A. No. 150 of 2011, that the allegations
made therein were not denied. It rightly allowed it, taking notice of
the urgency expressed by the respondents and their submission of
interference by the petitioners in violation of the injunction order
granted by the Court. Therefore, no exception can be taken to the
action of the Court below in allowing I.A. No. 150 of 2011.-2015 A.P.(2014) MSKLAWREPORTS