INTRODUCTION
The legal guidelines for obtaining an injunction restraining a party from breaching a contract or a particular performance of a contract are outlined in the Specific Relief Act of 1963. An Indian law known as the Specific Relief Act, of 1963 allows for the particular enforcement of particular kinds of contracts and the issuance of injunctions under defined circumstances. The Act applies when monetary damages are insufficient as a remedy and the court has the authority to compel the party who violated the agreement to carry out particular actions. Declaratory judgments, injunctions, and specific performance of a contract are among the reliefs made available under the Act. The Act further specifies the conditions under which a specific performance may be rejected, including ambiguous contracts and agreements involving personal services. The Act also covers the recovery of property possession and, in certain cases, the appointment of a receiver.
PREVENTIVE RELIEF
Court rulings known as injunctions compel a party to perform or abstain from particular acts. These are strong remedies that can be applied to stop damage, defend legal rights, or put a party back in the same situation. Remedial, preventive, or both types of orders are possible.[1] Preventive relief is a type that aims to prevent harm rather than compensate for it means where a court orders to prevent or stop the wrongful act before it happens by issuing a restraining order or an injunction. Section 36 states that the Preventive relief, as authorized by the Specific Relief Act of 1963, gives judges the ability to impose injunctions, whether they be temporary or permanent.[2] To ensure that irreversible harm is avoided while legal proceedings are underway, temporary injunctions are granted to temporarily stop actions until a final decision is rendered in a case. Contrarily, permanent injunctions offer long-term relief by permanently prohibiting parties from taking specific actions following a careful review of the case’s merits, guaranteeing the defence of legal rights, and averting further violations.
TEMPORARY INJUNCTIONS
The idea of a temporary injunction is covered under Section 37(1) of the Specific Relief Act. According to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, courts can grant temporary injunctions to preserve the current situation or stop harm from happening right away until a lawsuit’s outcome is determined. These injunctions are transient and may be issued at any point throughout the court case. While a case is pending, they act as stopgap remedies to protect rights and avoid permanent harm.[3] In case of a property ownership dispute, the court has the authority to issue a temporary injunction, which stops one party from selling or transferring the property until the ownership dispute is settled.
PERPETUAL INJUNCTIONS
The idea of a perpetual injunction is covered under Section 37(2) of the Specific Relief Act. It is the last or permanent order made by the court and is granted by the decree, which is issued following a thorough trial or based solely on the merits of the case. The parties’ ultimate rights are established by this injunction. The Specific Relief Act’s provisions apply to it. It is by its very nature permanent. Section 38 of the Specific Relief Act has three sections that are primarily responsible for granting a perpetual injunction. The following are these provisions: The plaintiff may be awarded a perpetual injunction to stop the violation of any implied or expressly existent obligation in his favour. The court will only grant this if it is satisfied that the plaintiff has a right and the defendant is violating that right by failing to perform legally enforceable duties. This is the court’s final available remedy; if the bench decides to pursue another course of action, this one will not be approved. The norms and requirements found in Chapter 2 shall serve as the court’s guidance where any such duty results from a contract.
The Specific Relief Act’s Chapter 2 addresses a contract’s special performance. If a contract-related obligation exists and one party is deliberately failing to fulfil it, the court will adhere to Chapter 2’s guidelines.
The court may issue a perpetual injunction in the following situations when the defendant violates or threatens to violate the plaintiff’s enjoyment of or right to property: —
- When the defendant is a trustee of the plaintiff’s property
- When there is no accepted method for estimating the true extent of the invasion’s damage or the likelihood of it causing harm;
- When the invasion is so severe that monetary compensation would not provide sufficient relief
- When preventing multiple court processes necessitates the injunction.[4]
MANDATORY INJUNCTIONS
The Specific Relief Act, of 1963 defines mandatory injunctions in Section 39. This clause states that mandatory injunctions are given by the court in situations where it is necessary to stop the breach of an obligation and the wrongdoer may be forced to execute specific acts. Any obligation and its breach, whether resulting from a contract or a tort, are covered by this remedy. Permanent or temporary injunctions are both possible; only very rarely are interim injunctions rendered mandatory. The purpose of a mandatory injunction is to force the defendant to put everything back to as it was. This kind of injunction is issued to shield the plaintiff from additional harm or losses. A mandatory injunction prohibits the defendant from carrying on the unlawful situation that was in place at the time the injunction was granted. Once more, the Court may decide not to grant this order under its discretionary jurisdiction. The court must carefully consider all the facts and circumstances before issuing a required injunction. In appropriate instances, granting a mandatory injunction is justified if there is merely a hypothetical threat of infringement against existing rights. The goal and outcome of the injunctions is to seek to return things to how they were before. However, because a mandatory injunction mandates the performance of an act, its immediate impact is undoubtedly more severe. This implies that the defendant will inevitably have to pay for costs and deal with difficulties, which might be significant.[5]
CLAIMING DAMAGES ALONGSIDE OR INSTEAD OF AN INJUNCTION
A plaintiff seeking a required injunction (Section 39) or a perpetual injunction (Section 38) may also seek damages in a proceeding under Section 40 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. The injunction may be sought instead of or in addition to these damages. If the court deems it appropriate, it may grant such damages. However, these damages had to be expressly requested by the plaintiff in their initial complaint (plaint). If not, the court may allow them to add this claim to the complaint at any point during the legal process. A plaintiff cannot later file a case for damages for a breach of obligation if the lawsuit to stop the breach is dismissed.[6]
CONCLUSION
Under the Specific Relief Act of 1963, injunctions are vital legal instruments intended to avert injury and safeguard legal rights. They can be in the form of mandatory injunctions (Section 39), which demand specific actions to correct wrongful situations, perpetual injunctions (Section 37(2) and Section 38) for long-term relief following a thorough case review, or temporary injunctions (Section 37(1)) to maintain the status quo during litigation.
With the possibility for plaintiffs to seek damages in addition to or instead of injunctive relief, these injunctions provide immediate and enduring protection against violations (Section 40). The Specific Relief Act gives courts the tools they need to properly administer justice, protect rights, and avert harm by offering various remedies.
Author(s) Name: Shubhada Ravindra Bole (SNDT University, Mumbai)
References:
[1] Admin, “The Specific Relief Act (SRA), 1963: A Comprehensive Analysis” (Century Law Firm Blog, September 5, 2023) <https://www.centurylawfirm.in/blog/the-specific-relief-act-sra-1963-a-comprehensive-analysis/> accessed 22 June 2024.
[2] Specific Relief Act 1963 (India).
[3] Ibid
[4] ——, “Preventive Relief under the Specific Relief Act” (Lexpeeps, July 25, 2020) <https://lexpeeps.in/preventive-relief-under-the-specific-relief-act/> accessed 22 June 2024.
[5] ——, “Analysis of Injunction under Special Relief Act, 1963” (Indian Legal Solution, July 2, 2020) <https://indianlegalsolution.com/analysis-of-injunction-under-special-relief-act-1963/#:~:text=The%20mandatory%20injunctions%20are%20defined%20under%20Section%2039,cases%2C%20mandatory%20injunctions%20are%20issued%20by%20the%20court> accessed 22 June 2024.
[6] “Injunctions Under Specific Relief Act: A Judicial Review” <https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-8340-injunctions-under-specific-relief-act-a-judicial-review.html> accessed 22 June 2024.
