Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.34 seconds)
M.L. Dalmiya And Company Limited vs Pragati Engineering Pvt. Limited And ... on 8 March, 1989 cites

Albert Judah Judah vs Rampada Gupta And Anr. on 3 March, 1958

8. It is true that the respondent caused a breach of contract by revocation of the irrevocable power of attorney. It is still debatable as to whether the appellant could legitimately claim to enjoy the authority to receive payment under the power of attorney. But what material and irreparable injury would flow therefrom? The appellant cannot recover his dues, if any, on account of the revocation of the Power of Attorney. But he has already sued for his dues. The Court normally does not grant injunction to protect the claim before adjudication. It is no substitute for attachment before judgment. Our attention is invited to a decision in Albert Judah v. Rampada . The single Bench decision of course supports the contention that even in a money suit injunction may be granted.
Calcutta High Court Cites 54 - Cited by 20 - Full Document

Swadeshi Industries Ltd. vs Administrator Panihati Municipality on 13 May, 1958

In Swadeshi Industries Ltd. v. Administrator, Panihati Municipality , High Court granted an injunction in the particular circumstances of the case. The rate payer challenged the authority of the person dealing with the appeal against assessment and prayed for injunction restraining the Municipality from realising Municipal taxes on the basis of impugned assessment. High Court repelled the argument that injunction restraining realisation of taxes is not to be granted since Municipality is rich enough to repay the excess payment, if any and granted injunction. Injunction may therefore be granted even in a money claim also and we do not as we obviously cannot propose to lay down any proposition to the contrary.. But in the instant case, we do not propose to grant the discretionary relief since the appellant would not suffer any irreparable injury if it ultimately succeeds in its Suit, even though no interlocutory injunction is granted. We do not, therefore, interfere with the impugned order passed by the lower court.
Calcutta High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 2 - K C Gupta - Full Document
1