Bombay HC: How Appellate court should exercise his discretion while deciding misc. civil appeal against the order of temporary injunction??

 The scope of jurisdiction available to this Court at this stage is well known. The temporary injunction is a discretionary relief granted to preserve the subject matter till end of civil suit & to satisfy the decree therein. Prima facie case, balance of convenience & possibility of the irreparable loss are the tests applied by trial court & this Court can interfere only if there is any perversity or jurisdictional error. If the trial court has after proper appreciation of records and contentions reached a plausible finding, this Court can not overrule it merely because some other view is also possible. In the case of Wander Ltd. v. Antox India P. Ltd., MANU/SC/0595/1990 : 1990 (Supp) SCC 727, the Hon. Apex Court has considered the question of grant of interlocutory injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 Code of Civil Procedure in a case under Section 29(2) of the Act and Section 55 of the Copyright Act, 1957 and held as follows :-

Usually, the prayer for grant of an interlocutory injunction is at a stage when the existence of the legal right asserted by the plaintiff and its alleged violation are both contested and uncertain and remain uncertain till they are established at the trial on evidence. The court, at this stage, acts on certain well settled principles of administration of this form of interlocutory remedy which is both temporary and discretionary. The object of the interlocutory injunction, it is stated- "............. is to protect the plaintiff against injury by violation of his rights for which he could not adequately be compensated in damages recoverable in the action if the uncertainty were resolved in his favour at the trial. The need for such protection must be weighed against the corresponding need of the defendant to be protected against injury resulting from his having bee prevented from exercising his own legal rights for which he could not be adequately compensated. The court must weigh one need against another and determine where the 'balance of convenience' lies.

The interlocutory remedy is intended to preserve in status quo, the rights of parties which may appear of a prima facie case. The Court also, in restraining a defendant from exercising what he considers his legal right but what the plaintiff would like to be prevented, puts into the scales, as a relevant consideration whether the defendant has yet to commence his enterprise or whether he has already been doing so in which latter case considerations somewhat different from those that apply to a case where the defendant is yet to commence his enterprise, are attracted. xxx xxx xxx xxx The appeals before the Division Bench were against the exercise of discretion by the Single Judge. In such appeals, the appellate court will not interfere with the exercise of discretion except where the discretion has been shown to have been exercised arbitrarily, or capriciously or perversely or where the court had ignored the settled principles of law regulating grant or refusal of interlocutory injunctions. An appeal against exercise of discretion is said to be an appeal on principle. Appellate court will not reassess the material and seek to reach a conclusion different from the one reached by the court below if the one reached by that court was reasonably possible on the material. The appellate court would normally not be justified in interfering with the exercise of discretion under appeal solely on the ground that if it had considered the matter at the trial stage it would have come to a contrary conclusion. If the discretion has been exercised by the trial court reasonably and in a judicial manner the fact that the appellate court would have taken a different view may not justify interference with the trial court's exercise of discretion. {Para 8}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY

Appeal From Order No. 838 of 2011

Decided On: 05.11.2012

Mangalam Group Vs. Nandkumar Bhalchandra Bhondve

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.

Citation: 2013(1) ABR 331,MANU/MH/1819/2012

Print Page

Guidance Note for District Judges and Family Court Judges on Deciding Child Custody Disputes

 

Overview

In child custody disputes, the governing principle is that the welfare and best interest of the child is the paramount consideration, overriding the competing claims and legal rights of the parents. Indian courts have repeatedly held that custody proceedings are not to be treated as ordinary adversarial civil trials and that the court is not bound by strict rules of evidence or procedure in the same manner as in regular civil litigation.

Print Page

Supreme Court direct that in a subsequent maintenance proceeding, the applicant shall disclose the previous maintenance proceeding, and the orders passed therein

 Directions on overlapping jurisdictions

It is well settled that a wife can make a claim for maintenance under different statutes. For instance, there is no bar to seek maintenance both under the D.V. Act and Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., or under H.M.A. It would, however, be inequitable to direct the husband to pay maintenance under each of the proceedings, independent of the relief granted in a previous proceeding. If maintenance is awarded to the wife in a previously instituted proceeding, she is under a legal obligation to disclose the same in a subsequent proceeding for maintenance, which may be filed under another enactment. While deciding the quantum of maintenance in the subsequent proceeding, the civil court/family court shall take into account the maintenance awarded in any previously instituted proceeding, and determine the maintenance payable to the claimant.

To overcome the issue of overlapping jurisdiction, and avoid conflicting orders being passed in different proceedings, we direct that in a subsequent maintenance proceeding, the applicant shall disclose the previous maintenance proceeding, and the orders passed therein, so that the Court would take into consideration the maintenance already awarded in the previous proceeding, and grant an adjustment or set-off of the said amount. If the order passed in the previous proceeding requires any modification or variation, the party would be required to move the concerned court in the previous proceeding.

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 730 OF 2020

RAJNESH  Vs  NEHA & Anr

Dated: November 4, 2020.

Citation: MANU/SC/0833/2020 : (2021) 2 SCC 324

Read full judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Master the File, Control the Court: How Judges Should Read and Manage Case Files Like Seasoned Adjudicators

 Every advocate can flip through a case file. Only a few truly understand it. The same truth applies—perhaps more critically—to the Bench.

A Senior Advocate does not merely read pages; he identifies the real dispute, separates facts from allegations, connects facts with law, and walks into court with a winning strategy. A Judge must do something even more demanding: master the file so thoroughly that every hearing advances the case toward a just, reasoned, and timely decision.

Print Page