court which was persuaded
to grant an ex-parte ad interim injunction
confiding in the applicant that having been
shown indulgence by the court ... answered in the negative
holding that the Trial Court is not justified in granting
an ex-parte injunction on IA No.3 for the second
Court that while
considering I.A. for Temporary Injunction, the trial
Court has strangely granted permanent injunction
which is impermissible ... held in
the negative holding that the trial court is not justified
in granting Permanent Injunction including the property
of the 1st defendant. The same
material documents relied upon by the Courts below,
refusal of injunction, which is a discretionary power
should be exercised cautiously. Since the same ... negative
holding that the Courts below are not justified in
rejecting the application filed by the plaintiffs for grant
of temporary injunction under Order XXXIX
answered in the negative holding that the Trial
Court is not justified in granting injunction in favour of
the plaintiff, without considering the application
while passing an
order of injunction, all relevant factors,
including as to how the object of granting
20
injunction itself shall be defeated ... been a true
impossibility of giving notice of motion......
An ex-parte injunction should generally
be until a certain day, usually the next motion
made in R.A.
No.36/2017 granting temporary injunction was
maintainable before the District Judge under the provisions
of Section ... against the
interlocutory order passed in RA No.36/2017 granting
temporary injunction was maintainable and hence, rejected
32
the application. The same
petitioner already filed suit in
O.S.No.124/2017 for permanent injunction and the
same is admittedly pending adjudication between the
parties. Therefore, petitioner ... consideration in the writ petition has to be answered in
the negative holding that the Deputy Commissioner is
not the competent authority to take action
point raised
in the present appeal is answered in the negative holding
that the appellant has not made out any case for
interference by this ... said interim order, the present
suit is filed for specific performance, injunction etc., and as
on the date of filing of the suit, the alleged
point raised in
the present writ petition is answered partly in the
negative holding that the trial Court is not justified in
making adverse remarks ... trial Court to take up the
application-I.A. for temporary injunction for hearing
immediately and dispose of same on its merits within 7
days
recorded a finding that this Court
has passed ad-interim temporary injunction on
19.11.2013. This application was filed on 03.01.2014.
In support of her case ... Mere marking of documents is not
proof. The plaintiff has not produced negatives of the
17
photos. It is not known how the photographs were
