against the petitioner. Along with the suit, the
second respondent also filed an application for interim injunction ... interim injunction application, the second respondent has now
resorted to lodge the present complaint upon frustration and as a tool for
oppression and harassment
second application, he prayed for re-delivery of the property; in the third application, he prayed for an interim injunction restraining the petitioner herein from ... application for injunction, there is an order that the application was not maintainable. It is not known, how on earth the second respondent
before the Fast Track Court, the applicant moved an application for injunction in the second suit C.S.No.970 of 2010. In that application ... merely sought time for filing a counter, when the application for injunction in the second suit
participate in the General Body Meeting. The second original application being filed for temporary mandatory injunction directing the BCCI to act under clause ... first original application was filed with a prayer to suspend the amendment to clause 6.2.4, the second application being for temporary injunction restraining N.Srinivasan
injunction restraining the second defendant viz., Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, from receiving payment under the suit guarantee Thereupon the second defendant filed Application ... Along with the plaint, the plaintiff had also filed an injunction application and the second defendant had filed vakalat and had taken time for filing
injunction against the owners, that they would not dispossess the second respondent the business either by force or by unlawful means, and they would take ... also made endorsement in the injunction application that they would take appropriate legal proceedings against the second respondent in the appropriate forum for taking delivery
applicant in Company Application No. 602 of 1992. He filed the above application for an order of interim injunction restraining the second respondent, M. Sekaran ... Therefore he prays that an injunction order should be issued restraining the second respondent an his associates from holding an extraordinary general meeting on April
passed by the learned single judge, rejecting the interlocutory application for interim injunction filed by the appellant herein.
2. The appellant, who is running ... herein by the second respondent. In the said writ petition, the appellant filed an interlocutory application for grant of interim injunction, restraining the respondents
Code of Civil Procedure , seeking an order of interim injunction restraining the second defendant officials from in any way despatching/sending/releasing the Demand Draft ... dated 3.8.1994 and 17.8.1994 issued by the second respondent. The first respondent/plaintiff also filed another application in I.A.No.8726 of 1995 with
This application is filed seeking for an order of mandatory temporary injunction, directing the first respondent not to permit the second respondent from contesting ... This application is for an order of temporary injunction restraining the second respondent from functioning as the Secretary of the first respondent, pending disposal
