What are specialized Injunction orders which are issued by Indian courts?

 Indian courts recognize several specialized injunctions beyond the standard temporary, perpetual, mandatory, and prohibitory types, often adapted for IP, commercial, and digital disputes under CPC Order XXXIX and Specific Relief Act provisions.

IP and Evidence Preservation

1) Anton Piller Order (Search and Seizure):

Authorizes the plaintiff to enter the defendant's premises, search for, and seize infringing goods or evidence (e.g., counterfeit products, pirated copies) to prevent destruction, typically in trademark/copyright cases. Known as "John Doe" or "Ashok Kumar" order in India when defendants are unidentified; first issued by Delhi HC in Taj Television v. Rajan Mandal (2002).

Print Page

Executing court can issue freezing order even though property is situated outside its jurisdiction

  Now coming to the challenge of the judgment debtor to the refusal of the High Court to interfere with the orders dated 19.3.2003 and 7.7.2003, we find no merit in it. First of all, the judgment debtor had not challenged those orders at the appropriate time and had allowed them to operate until he chose to challenge them while challenging the rejection of his objection to jurisdiction raised later. Of course, his argument is that once it is found that the court has no jurisdiction to proceed, the orders passed by it earlier should also automatically fall to the ground. We cannot agree. By order dated 19.3.2003 what the executing court did was, to direct a third party, who had subsequently acceded to the jurisdiction of the executing court, not to handover possession of the building in question and the documents concerned, to the judgment debtor. It is seen that the third person submitted to the jurisdiction of the court and surrendered the documents in his possession to the executing court and prayed to that court that he be relieved from the responsibility of managing the property in the circumstances stated by him in his application. It was in that context that the executing court passed another order dated 7.7.2003 that the documents produced by the third party be kept in safe custody of the court. These two orders are certainly within the jurisdiction of the court which passed the decree since they are only orders of restraint being issued to a person from handing over a property in his possession to the judgment debtor along with the concerned documents and keeping the documents in safe custody. They are in the nature of a "freezing order" or a "Mareva injunction" and an order akin to an Anton Piller order, orders that can be issued even if the property or the person concerned is outside the jurisdiction of the court.

Supreme Court of India

Mohit Bhargava vs Bharat Bhushan Bhargava & Ors on 20 April, 2007

Bench: S.B. Sinha, P.K. Balasubramanyan

Citation;2007(5)MHLJ SC 1

Print Page