Case Note & Summary
Background: The dispute arose over a green belt in Sector 7 of an urban estate in Faridabad, which the appellant-association sought to preserve as per plans prepared by the Faridabad Urban Development Authority. The first respondent allegedly intended to convert the green belt into a petrol pump. The appellant-association filed a civil suit for perpetual injunction to restrain the respondents from undertaking this conversion. Facts: The trial court initially granted an ad-interim injunction but later vacated it. On appeal, the District Judge found a prima facie case in favour of the appellant-association and granted ad-interim injunction. The first respondent challenged this before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana in Civil Revision Petition No. 1191 of 1995. The High Court vacated the appellate court's order and affirmed the trial court's vacation. The appellant-association then approached the Supreme Court by special leave. Legal Issues: The core question was whether the High Court was justified in interfering with the appellate court's discretionary order granting interim injunction, and whether the green belt should be preserved pending final disposal of the suit. Arguments: The appellant-association urged preservation of the green belt and continuation of injunction, while the respondents opposed interim injunction and sought to allow the petrol pump to continue. The Supreme Court heard learned counsel for both sides but did not record detailed submissions. Court's Analysis: The Supreme Court, after considering the material on record, held that the High Court was not wholly unjustified in interfering with the appellate court's order. However, since the suit was pending, the Court declined to examine the merits. It directed that observations and findings recorded by the courts below in interim proceedings should not affect the final disposal of the suit. It directed the trial Judge to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible within four months from receipt of the order. Pending disposal, the first respondent was at liberty to continue running the petrol pump as it existed, without causing any detriment to the environment. Any action taken by the first respondent would be subject to the result in the suit, and the first respondent was not entitled to plead any equity at the time of disposal. Decision: The Supreme Court disposed of the appeal accordingly, without costs, declining to interfere with the High Court's order.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Interim Injunction - Green Belt Preservation - Not mentioned - The suit sought perpetual injunction to restrain conversion of green belt into petrol pump - The trial court initially granted then vacated ad-interim injunction, and the appellate court restored it; the High Court set aside the restoration - Held that the Supreme Court would not interfere with the High Court's order as it was not wholly unjustified (Paras Not mentioned). B) Appellate Jurisdiction - Special Leave Petition - Interference with Concurrent Interim Orders - Not mentioned - The Supreme Court declined to examine merits while the suit was pending and disposed of the appeal solely with procedural directions - Held that observations and findings of lower courts in interim proceedings should not affect final disposal of the suit (Paras Not mentioned). C) Environmental Law - Environmental Protection - Continuation of Existing Use Pending Suit - Not mentioned - The first respondent was permitted to continue running the petrol pump as it existed, without causing detriment to the environment - Held that any action taken by the first respondent would be subject to the result in the suit and no equity could be pleaded at disposal (Paras Not mentioned).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court was justified in vacating the appellate court's order granting ad-interim injunction and affirming the trial court's vacation; Whether interim relief should be granted pending suit to preserve green belt
Final Decision
Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, not inclined to interfere with High Court order vacating injunction; directed trial Judge to dispose of suit within four months; pending disposal, first respondent may continue to run petrol pump as exists today without causing environmental detriment; any action subject to suit result; first respondent not entitled to plead equity. No costs.
Law Points
- Interim injunction orders by trial court not to be lightly interfered with by High Court unless appellate court's order unjustified
- observations in interim orders do not affect final suit
- expeditious disposal of suits involving environmental issues
- party continuing use pending suit subject to final result and cannot plead equity
