Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

We are in full agreement with the finding of the learned Court below that Section 42 of the Specific Relief Act does not confer any right to claim injunction to prevent the breach of a negative covenant. Section 42 confers a discretion on the Court to grant an injunction to perform a negative agreement even though it is unable to compel specific performance of the affirmative agreement.

To cite an example, an agreement to render service on the basis of technical know-how, data, drawings, plans and specifications provided by the principal, may not be specifically enforceable. However, even though such an agreement to render service were not specifically enforceable, any negative covenant in the agreement preventing the other party from utilising technical know-how, data, drawings, plans and specifications etc. provided by the principal may be enforced by injunction.

Similarly, even if a development agreement were not specifically enforceable at the instance of a developer as held in Vipin Bhimani Vs. Sunanda Das (supra) any negative covenant in the development agreement, preventing the owner from using drawings, plans etc. prepared by the developer might be enforced by injunction.

The Court has complete discretion to decide whether or not to grant injunction to prevent breach of a negative covenant, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case. Needless to mention that the discretion cannot be exercised arbitrarily, but in accordance with law, in consonance with principles of justice and fair play, taking into account the prima facie case the balance of convenience and the question of whether the applicant for injunction can monetarily be compensated for the breach alleged.