Grant of interim injunction

2016 MLD 1077 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

S.20, O.VII, R.10 & O.XXXIX, Rr.1 & 2Territorial jurisdictionReturn of plaintGrant of interim injunctionScope

Subject matter of case was within territorial jurisdiction of place "M", whereas plaintiff instituted suit in Civil Court at place "L", which court lacked territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit

Trial Court instead of passing ad-interim injunction, while entertaining the suit, should have returned the plaint for its presentation before proper forum for adjudication in accordance with law.

2014 YLR 2442 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR Judicial Precedent

O. XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2Azad Jammu and Kashmir Mirpur Development Authority Ordinance, 1974 S.11Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), S. 44Grant of interim injunctionConditionsScope

Conditions necessary for issuance of a stay order were a good prima facie arguable case, irreparable loss which a party would suffer if stay order was not issued or due to issuance of stay order the other party would suffer loss and balance of convenience

Question of irreparable loss had to be considered by the court if a good prima facie arguable case was made out by a party

Irreparable loss was the loss which would be suffered by a party if stay order was issued or not

Party was not bound to show all the circumstances for success of his/her case for making out a good prim facie case

Raising a fair question for determination by the court was sufficient for the same

In the present case, Master/sector plan could only be changed by the Development Authority with prior approval of Government under the provisions of Mirpur Development Authority Ordinance, 1974

Corner position of the plots of petitioner had been changed without jurisdiction by the Development Authority due to which he had got a good prima facie arguable case and if respondents succeeded in raising the construction then he would suffer an irreparable loss

Balance of convenience would also lie in favour of petitioner

Supreme Court (AJ&K) directed that respondents should not raise construction in the plots till disposal of writ petition by the High Court and they should maintain the status quo

Supreme Court further directed the High Court to consider after providing an opportunity to the Development Authority whether master/sector plan had been changed with approval of Government or not and functionaries of said Authority were directed to refrain from altering master/sector plan in an arbitrary manner without prior sanction of Government and Authority.

2014 CLD 1583 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

O. XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2Grant of interim injunctionEssential ingredients

Party seeking interim injunction must show that a prima facie case existed in his favour, the court be satisfied that if injunction is not issued, irreparable damage or injury would be caused to such party and the balance of convenience has to be in favour of the grant of injunction.