Delhi HC: Difference in Layout is of No Consequence if Essential Feature of Trademark Infringed  ||  Allahabad HC: Parliament has Responsibility to Restrain Criminals from Entering Into Politics  ||  Delhi HC Refuses to Vacate Stay on Direction to Enforce CM's Speech Promising Rent Relief  ||  J&K&L HC: Judges Must Refrain from Making Derogatory Remarks Against Parties  ||  Delhi HC: Courts Should be Sensitive When Poor And Deprived Knock at its Doors  ||  CESTAT: Law Does Not Mandate Customs Broker to Physically Verify Address of Client  ||  Orissa HC: Appeal Can’t be Dismissed on Sole Ground of Non-Submission of Certified Order  ||  ITAT: Deposit of Banned Notes Received Out of Cash Sales During Demonetization Period is Valid  ||  ITAT: Arrangement Between Spouse Without Real Money Exchange Not Amount to Unexplained Investment  ||  ITAT: 100% Deduction U/S 80IC of IT Act allowable when Industry undergone Substantial Expansion    

Acqua Borewell Pvt. Ltd. vs. Swayam Prabha and Ors. - (Supreme Court) (17 Nov 2021)

Injunction orders cannot be passed against third parties without hearing them

MANU/SC/1074/2021

Civil

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common judgment passed by the High Court, by which the High Court has allowed the aforesaid appeals in part and has modified the interim injunction granted by the ‘trial Court’ and restricted the injunction against alienation to the extent of 1/7th share in the total plaint schedule properties till the disposal of the case, the third parties have preferred the present appeals.

Before granting any injunction with respect to the properties in which the Appellants herein (proposed Defendants) are claiming right, title or interest on the basis of the development agreements or otherwise, they ought to have been given an opportunity of being heard. No injunction could have been granted against them without impleading them as Defendants and thereafter without giving them an opportunity of being heard.

It is required to be noted that, the learned trial Court dismissed the injunction application and refused injunction by observing that, some of the properties are evidently owned by the firms/trusts/companies which have not been made parties to the suit. Therefore, the impugned common judgment and order passed by the High Court granting injunction with respect to 1/7th share in the total plaint schedule properties which has been passed without giving an opportunity of being heard to the Appellants and without impleading them as party- defendants in the suit by the learned trial Court, is unsustainable and deserves to be quashed and set aside. The impugned common judgment and order passed by the High Court granting injunction against alienation to the extent of 1/7th share in the total plaint schedule properties is hereby quashed and set aside. The present appeals are allowed.

Tags : INJUNCTION   THIRD PARTY   HEARING  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2022 - All Rights Reserved