SRIDHAR PANDA Vs. TARAMANI DIBYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER 's, prayer for temporary injunction to restrain the opposite parties from entering upon the suit land, causing waste and damage to the same, or altering the existing structure and from interfering with the peaceful possession over the suit land and building standing thereon having been rejected by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Puri and learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Puri in appeal, this Court has been moved.

(2.) BACKGROUND facts necessary for disposal of the present application essentially run as follows :

(3.) AN injunction is a judicial process whereby a party is ordered to refrain from doing or to do particular act or thing. In the former case it is cahed a restrictive injunction and in the latter a mandatory injunction. (See Halsbury's Law of England : 2nd Ed. Vol. 21). Injunction may be either final remedy obtained by a suit, or a preliminary and interlocautory relief granted while the suit is pending. In the first case it is decree, in the second an order or writ. Whatever be its forms, decree or order, the remedy by ordinary injunction is wholly preventive, prohibitory or protective. The same is true in theory and in form of a mandatory injunction which always by its language prohibits the continuance of an act or a structure although in effect and in its essential nature it is wholly restorative and compels the defendants to restore the thing to its original situation. An injunction is merely a, process by which Court enforces equity. It is an order of an equitable nature. It is a judicial process whereby a party is ordered to refrain from doing or to do a particular act or thing. The farmer is generally called a restrictive injunction and the latter is called 'mandatory injunction'. An interlucutory or interim injunction is to preserve matters in situ until the case can be tried. There must be some equitable groom, for interference by injunction such as a necessity of preventing irreparable mischief or in cases when the injury apprehended is of a character as cannot be adequately compensated by damages or is one which must occasion constantly recurring grievance which necessitates a preventive remedy in order to put an end to repeated perpetration of wrong. This power has to be exercised sparingly or cautiously and only after thoughful deliberation and with a full conviction on the part of the Court of its urgency and necessity.