Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

In these circumstances, the matter is referred to us and the short but important question we have to examine here is this.

Whether the civil courts can issue directions to the Police Officials in order to execute the order of the civil courts or to implement the order of injunction passed by the civil courts.

4. Mr. G. Subramaniyam, the learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that there being no provision in the Code in this behalf, the civil court has inherent powers under Section 151 of the Code to issue directions to the police officials in order to execute the orders of the civil courts or to implement the order of injunction passed by the civil court. On the other hand, Mr. Ilango, the learned Counsel for the respondent submitted that the civil court has no jurisdiction to grant police aid particularly, with regard to the implementation of the orders of injunction granted by the civil courts. The learned Counsel for the respondents further contended that Order 39, Rule 2-A of the Code provides for the disobedience or breach of injunction and Order 21, Rule 32 of the Code provides for execution of the decree for injunction; therefore, by invoking the inherent powers under Section 151, the court cannot issue directions to the police officials in order to execute the decree of injunction or to implement the order of temporary injunction granted by them.

22. We must bear in mind that when an order of temporary injunction is granted by the court under Order 39, Rule 1 of the Code or when a decree for permanent injunction is passed by the civil court, it involves the following three stages:
The first stage is the issue of an order of temporary injunction or passing of a decree for permanent injunction. When a petition under Order 39, Rule 1 of the Code is filed by a party, the court being satisfied that the conditions prescribed under Order 39, Rule 1 of the Code are satisfied, may issue an order of temporary injunction in favour of the party, who has applied for the same. Similarly, the court after full trial of a suit and upon the merits of the case, may pass a decree for permanent injunction in favour of a party. There is specific provision in the Code namely Order 39, Rule 1 dealing with the grant of the order of temporary injunction. Section 38 of the Specific Relief Act deals with the circumstances under which a decree for perpetual injunction can be passed by the courts.
The second stage is the implementation of the order of temporary injunction or decree granting perpetual injunction. There is no specific provision under the Code dealing with the implementation of the order of temporary injunction or a decree for perpetual injunction.
The third stage is the punishment for disobedience of the order of injunction. Order 39, Rule 2-A of the Code deals with the consequences of disobedience or breach of injunction or other orders made under Order 39, Rule 1 of the Code. Order 21, Rule 32 of the Code says that where a party against whom a decree for injunction has been passed, has had an opportunity of obeying the decree but has wilfully failed to obey it, the decree for injunction may be enforced by his detention in civil prison or by the attachment of his property or by both. Thus, the Code contains specific provision with regard to the grant of an order of temporary injunction and for punishing the party who disobeys the order of temporary injunction and the decree for perpetual injunction. However, there is no provision in the Code providing for the implementation of the order of temporary injunction or decree for perpetual injunction granted by the courts. 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. As observed by the Full Bench of this Court in Century Flour Mills Ltd. v. Suppiah (1975)2 M.L.J. 54, when there is a violation of an order of injunction granted by the civil court, or when something has been, done in disobedience of such an order of injunction, it is the duty of the court as a matter of judicial Policy to undo the wrong done in disobedience of the court's order and the power to enforce the order of injunction by ordering police aid is available under Section 151 of the Code.

27. In Vamdachariyar v. The Commissioner of Police (1969)2 M.L.J. 1, Kailasam, J., as he then was, referred to the above view of Lord Denning, M.R. in R v. Metropolitan Police Commissioner (1968)1 All E.R. 763, observed as follows:

The plea of the Commissioner that it is within him discretion to take action or not has no basis in law. It is his duty to enforce the law of the land. As ruled by Edmund Davies, L.J., this plea should never have been advanced.

28. When the police authorities owe a legal duty to enforce law and when the public are entitled to seek directions under Article 226 of the Constitution for discharge of such duties by the police Authorities, as pointed out by the learned Judge himself, we see no reason to hold that the civil courts cannot in an appropriate case issue directions under Section 1.51 of the Code for the proper implementation of the order of injunction granted by the court. In view of the above position, we are unable to share the view of Srinivasan, J. that a direction to the police authorities cannot be issued under Section 151 of the Code to enforce the order of temporary injunction the proceedings where an order of temporary injunction was passed.