Bombay High Court Allows Police Protection for Cultivation in Injunction Suit — Trial Court Erred in Rejecting Application for Police Aid Despite Subsisting Interim Injunction. Court holds that police protection is a necessary concomitant of an interim injunction to ensure its efficacy and prevent breach of peace.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Prosecution
  • 12
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, Hemant Vasant Jagtap and another, filed a suit for permanent injunction against the respondents, Haji Abdul Malik Haji Yunusisa and others, seeking to restrain them from interfering with their possession over the suit property. The trial court granted an interim injunction on January 7, 2022, restraining the defendants from causing obstruction. The defendants filed an appeal, but the injunction remained in force. The petitioners then filed an application (Exhibit-52) seeking police protection to cultivate the suit land, alleging that when they attempted to flatten the land with a JCB machine on January 8, 2022, they were obstructed. The trial court rejected this application on June 30, 2022, leading to the present writ petition. The High Court examined whether the trial court was justified in denying police protection. The court noted that the interim injunction was still operative and that the petitioners had a right to enjoy the property. The court held that police protection is a necessary concomitant of an interim injunction to ensure its efficacy and prevent breach of peace. The court also invoked its inherent powers under Section 151 CPC to grant such relief. The High Court set aside the trial court's order and directed the police to provide protection to the petitioners for cultivation of the suit land, subject to the petitioners giving an undertaking to abide by the final outcome of the suit.

Headnote

A) Civil Procedure - Interim Injunction - Police Protection - Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, Section 151 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - The trial court rejected the plaintiffs' application for police protection to cultivate the suit land despite an existing interim injunction in their favour. The High Court held that police protection is a necessary concomitant of an interim injunction to ensure its efficacy and prevent breach of peace. The court directed the police to provide protection to the plaintiffs for cultivation. (Paras 1-15)

B) Civil Procedure - Inherent Powers - Section 151 CPC - Police Protection - The court held that even if there is no specific provision in the CPC for grant of police protection, the court has inherent powers under Section 151 CPC to pass such orders as are necessary to secure the ends of justice. (Para 12)

C) Civil Procedure - Interim Injunction - Enforcement - Police Protection - The court observed that the trial court's order rejecting police protection was erroneous as it failed to consider that the injunction order was still operative and that the plaintiffs had a right to enjoy the property. (Paras 10-13)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the trial court was justified in rejecting the plaintiffs' application for police protection to assist them in cultivating the suit land in pursuance of an interim injunction order that was still in force.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the trial court's order dated June 30, 2022, and directed the police to provide protection to the petitioners for cultivation of the suit land, subject to the petitioners giving an undertaking to abide by the final outcome of the suit.

Law Points

  • Police protection is a necessary concomitant of an interim injunction
  • Civil Court can grant police protection to enforce its orders
  • Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC
  • Section 151 CPC
  • Inherent powers of court
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2023 LawText (BOM) (01) 241

WRIT PETITION NO. 9980 OF 2022

2023-01-24

SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.

2023:BHC-AS:3577

Mr. R.M. Haridas, Mr. Anilkumar Patil, Mrs. V.S. Nimbalkar

Hemant Vasant Jagtap & anr.

Haji Abdul Malik Haji Yunusisa & Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging trial court's order rejecting application for police protection to assist in cultivation of suit land in pursuance of interim injunction.

Remedy Sought

Petitioners sought police protection to cultivate the suit land.

Filing Reason

Trial court rejected petitioners' application for police protection despite subsisting interim injunction in their favour.

Previous Decisions

Trial court granted interim injunction on January 7, 2022; appeal filed but injunction not stayed; trial court rejected police protection application on June 30, 2022.

Issues

Whether the trial court was justified in rejecting the application for police protection when an interim injunction was in force? Whether police protection can be granted as a concomitant of an interim injunction?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued that they were entitled to police protection to enforce the interim injunction and cultivate the land. Respondents opposed, contending that police protection cannot be granted in civil matters.

Ratio Decidendi

Police protection is a necessary concomitant of an interim injunction to ensure its efficacy and prevent breach of peace. The court has inherent powers under Section 151 CPC to grant such relief even if not specifically provided for.

Judgment Excerpts

Police protection is a necessary concomitant of an interim injunction to ensure its efficacy and prevent breach of peace. The court has inherent powers under Section 151 CPC to pass such orders as are necessary to secure the ends of justice.

Procedural History

Suit filed for permanent injunction; interim injunction granted on January 7, 2022; defendants filed appeal; petitioners filed application for police protection (Exhibit-52); trial court rejected application on June 30, 2022; petitioners filed writ petition in High Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, Section 151
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Police Protection for Cultivation in Injunction Suit — Trial Court Erred in Rejecting Application for Police Aid Despite Subsisting Interim Injunction. Court holds that police protection is a necessary concomitant of an int...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Appellant in Tender Dispute, Quashing High Court's Order and Permitting Project Completion. The Court held that judicial review in tender matters is limited to examining legality under Article 14 of the Constitution, and interfer...