Ex-parte Injunction in Indian Law: Meaning, Procedure, and Judicial Principles
Introduction to Ex-parte Injunction
An Ex-parte Injunction allows a court to grant temporary relief to one party without hearing the other. Courts use this power in urgent situations to prevent irreparable harm or injustice. In Indian law, this relief plays a crucial role in civil litigation, especially when immediate protection of rights is necessary.
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, under Order XXXIX Rules 1, 2, and 3, governs the procedure for such injunctions.
Meaning and Nature of Ex-parte Injunction
An Ex-parte Injunction stops a party from taking an action that might harm the applicant’s legal rights. The court issues it after hearing only one side. Such injunctions act as temporary measures and continue until both parties present their arguments.
Because the opposing party remains unheard initially, courts exercise this power carefully and only in rare circumstances.
Legal Framework: CPC Order XXXIX Rules 1, 2, and 3
Order XXXIX Rule 1 – Grant of Temporary Injunction
The court grants temporary injunctions when:
- The applicant presents a prima facie case.
- The risk of irreparable harm exists.
- The balance of convenience favors the applicant.
Order XXXIX Rule 2 – Preventing Repetition of a Wrong
This rule helps stop further acts that violate the applicant’s rights.
Order XXXIX Rule 3 – Issuing Injunction Without Notice
If a delay could defeat the purpose of justice, the court may issue an ex-parte injunction. The applicant must:
- Serve the opposing party with a copy of the application and relevant documents.
- Submit an affidavit explaining the urgency.
- Disclose all material facts truthfully.
Conditions Required for Ex-parte Injunction
Courts consider these essential elements before issuing an ex-parte injunction:
- Urgency: The situation must demand immediate action.
- Prima Facie Case: The applicant should show a valid legal claim.
- Balance of Convenience: The applicant must face more hardship than the respondent if the injunction is denied.
- Irreparable Injury: Compensation in money should not be an adequate remedy.
- Full Disclosure: The applicant must not suppress any material fact.
Landmark Judgments on Ex-parte Injunctions
1. Morgan Stanley Mutual Fund v. Kartick Das (1994)
The Supreme Court emphasized that courts must issue ex-parte injunctions only in exceptional cases and must record reasons in writing.
2. Dalpat Kumar v. Prahlad Singh (1992)
The court clarified that a mere possibility of injury does not justify an injunction. All three factors—prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable loss—must exist together.
3. Seema Arshad Zaheer v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (2006)
The court urged lower courts to avoid granting injunctions without notice unless absolutely necessary and demanded caution and fairness.
Duration and Continuance of Ex-parte Injunction
An ex-parte injunction remains in force until the next hearing. After hearing the other party, the court decides whether to:
- Confirm the injunction,
- Modify it, or
- Dismiss it.
If the applicant fails to inform the opposite party or hides crucial facts, the court may vacate the injunction immediately.
Remedies Available to the Opposite Party
When affected by an ex-parte injunction, the opposite party may:
- File an Application to Vacate the injunction under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC.
- File an Appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) CPC.
- Seek Review or Revision under appropriate provisions of CPC or Constitution.
Prevention of Misuse and Penalties
If the applicant misuses the injunction process by submitting false information or suppressing facts, the court may:
- Dismiss the suit,
- Impose costs or penalties, or
- Initiate contempt proceedings.
Judicial discipline discourages abuse of ex-parte injunctions to maintain fairness.