ORDER VACATING INJUNCTION

(Under Order 39 Rule 4 CPC)

IN THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (S.D.), [PLACE]
Regular Civil Suit No. ___ of 20__

[Plaintiff]
Versus
[Defendant]

ORDER BELOW EXH.__ (Order 39 Rule 4 CPC)
Date: //20__

1. Application

The defendant has preferred the present application under Order 39 Rule 4 CPC seeking vacation of the ad-interim injunction granted on //20__.

2. Grounds Urged

The defendant contends that:

• Plaintiff suppressed material facts.

• No prima facie title exists.

• Construction was ongoing long prior to suit.

• Injunction causes grave hardship.

3. Legal Position

Under Order 39 Rule 4 CPC, an injunction may be discharged, varied, or set aside if:

• It was obtained by suppression/misrepresentation, or

• Circumstances have changed, or

• Plaintiff fails to establish the triple test.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Wander Ltd. v. Antox India P. Ltd.
has held that injunction is discretionary and must be exercised judicially.

It is also settled that a party seeking equitable relief must approach the Court with clean hands.

4. Findings

(A) Suppression

The plaintiff did not disclose that prior suit regarding same property was dismissed on //__.

(B) Prima Facie Case

No documentary proof of possession is produced.

(C) Balance of Convenience

Construction is substantially completed. Stopping it would cause disproportionate harm.

(D) Irreparable Injury

Plaintiff can be compensated in damages if claim succeeds.

5. Conclusion

The plaintiff has failed to justify continuation of injunction.

6. Order

Application Exh.__ under Order 39 Rule 4 CPC is allowed.

The ad-interim injunction granted on //20__ stands vacated.

No order as to costs.

Pronounced in open Court.

(Civil Judge, SD)

⚖ Quick Judicial Comparison