Bombay High Court Grants Interim Injunction in Specific Performance Suits — Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. Restrains Trustees from Alienating Property. Prima Facie Case Established Based on Agreements and Possession; Balance of Convenience Favors Plaintiff.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Prosecution
  • 9
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The plaintiff, Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd., filed two suits for specific performance of agreements for sale of commercial units in a building. The suits were filed against trustees of family trusts and a cooperative society. The plaintiff sought interim injunctions restraining the defendants from alienating or encumbering the suit property. The court noted that the agreements were executed in 1980 and 1981, and the plaintiff had been in possession of the property. The defendants had attempted to sell the property to third parties. The court held that the plaintiff had made out a prima facie case, the balance of convenience was in favor of the plaintiff, and the plaintiff would suffer irreparable injury if the injunction was not granted. The court granted the interim injunctions as prayed.

Headnote

A) Specific Performance - Interim Injunction - Prima Facie Case - The court considered whether the plaintiffs had made out a prima facie case for the grant of an interim injunction restraining the defendants from transferring the suit property. The court held that the plaintiffs had a strong prima facie case based on the agreements and the conduct of the parties. (Paras 4-10)

B) Specific Performance - Interim Injunction - Balance of Convenience - The court examined the balance of convenience between the parties. It held that the balance of convenience was in favor of the plaintiffs as the property was unique and the defendants would not suffer any irreparable injury if restrained. (Paras 11-15)

C) Specific Performance - Interim Injunction - Irreparable Injury - The court found that the plaintiffs would suffer irreparable injury if the property was alienated during the pendency of the suit, as it would render the decree for specific performance infructuous. (Paras 16-20)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to an interim injunction restraining the defendants from alienating or encumbering the suit property pending disposal of the suits for specific performance.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the Notices of Motion and granted interim injunctions restraining the defendants from alienating, transferring, or encumbering the suit property until the disposal of the suits.

Law Points

  • Specific performance
  • Interim injunction
  • Prima facie case
  • Balance of convenience
  • Irreparable injury
  • Transfer of Property Act
  • 1882
  • Specific Relief Act
  • 1963
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2006 LawText (BOM) (09) 88

Notice of Motion No.1487 of 2001 in Suit No.2178 of 2001 and Notice of Motion No.1488 of 2001 in Suit No.2177 of 2001

2006-09-26

S.J. Vazifdar, J.

Ms.Rajni Iyer, Senior Counsel with Mr.Vikram Trivedi and Mr.S.R.Tilokchandani and Mr.Durgesh Khanapurkar i/b.M/s.M.K.Ambalal & Co. for the Plaintiffs; Mr.Aspi Chinoy, Senior Counsel with Mr.Pradip Sancheti i/b.Mr.H.K.Sudhakara & Ms.Tushna Thapiyal for Defendant Nos.3 and 7.

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

Nature of Litigation

Civil suits for specific performance of agreements for sale of immovable property.

Remedy Sought

Interim injunction restraining defendants from alienating or encumbering the suit property.

Filing Reason

Plaintiffs claim rights under agreements for sale and lease, and seek to prevent defendants from transferring property to third parties.

Issues

Whether the plaintiffs have a prima facie case for specific performance. Whether the balance of convenience lies in favor of granting an interim injunction. Whether the plaintiffs would suffer irreparable injury if the injunction is not granted.

Submissions/Arguments

Plaintiffs argued that they have a strong prima facie case based on the agreements and their possession. Defendants contended that the agreements were not binding and that the plaintiffs were not entitled to any relief.

Ratio Decidendi

In a suit for specific performance, an interim injunction can be granted if the plaintiff establishes a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury. The court must protect the subject matter of the suit to prevent the decree from becoming infructuous.

Judgment Excerpts

The plaintiffs have made out a strong prima facie case for the grant of an interim injunction. The balance of convenience is in favor of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs would suffer irreparable injury if the injunction is not granted.

Procedural History

The suits were filed in 2001. The plaintiffs took out Notices of Motion for interim injunctions. The court heard the motions and passed this common order on 26th September 2006.

Acts & Sections

  • Specific Relief Act, 1963:
  • Transfer of Property Act, 1882:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction for Murder and Attempt to Murder in Chain of Assaults — Evidence of Eye-witnesses Found Credible Despite Minor Inconsistencies
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Grants Interim Injunction in Specific Performance Suits — Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. Restrains Trustees from Alienating Property. Prima Facie Case Established Based on Agreements and Possession; Balance of C...