Rayat College of Law Affidavit

1
Rayat College of Law

(2018-2019)
Affidavit & appliati0 n
TOPIC: What are affidavit and applicati0n under civil law

1) The perf0rma 0f the affidavit
2Applicati0n fr grant 0f Temp0rary injuctin under 0rder 39. Civil
pr0cedure c0de
SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:
Mr. AJITABH MISHRA VARUN CHHABRA
(Asst. prof.) BALLB (HONS.)
8TH SEM 13690

2
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I feel highly elated to work on this dynamic and highly important topic that is “What are the
components of Deed, Forms of Deeds and Power of Attorney convey and explain the
followings:(1) Partnership Deed(2) Mortgage Deed(3) Deed for dissolution of partnership.”.
This topic instantly drew my attention and attracted me to research on it.
So, I hope I have tried my level best to bring in new ideas and thoughts regarding the basics
of this topic. Not to forget the deep sense of regard and gratitude to my faculty adviser, Mr.
Ajitabh Mishra who played the role of a protagonist. Last but not the least I thank all the
members of the Rayat college of Law and all others who have helped me in making this
project a success.
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction 4
2. Essential of deed 4-8
3. Parties of deed 8-11
4. Forms of deed 11-16
5. Operative words of conveyance 16
6. Power of attorney 16-18
7. Mortgage deed 18-31
8. Partnership deed 31-34
9. Deed for dissolution of partnership 34-39
BIBLIOGRAPHY 40
4
INTRODUCTION
Introduction
This report captures the outcomes of Changes – The Affidavit Project. The project gave
a forum for 25 young people in Toronto to speak out about their first-hand interactions with
police officers, and to give recommendations requesting change.
Changes – The Affidavit Project was conducted during 2010-11 at a community centre in
Toronto. The Street Youth Legal Services Lawyer at Justice for Children and Youth, a youth
worker at the community centre, a peer leader, and student volunteers worked together to
document the experiences youth had when interacting with the police. An anonymous affidavit
format was used to protect the identity of the youth, many of whom were fearful of the police
and of their identities being known. This report first shares the youths’ experiences and requests
for change. We then describe the legal remedies available to the youth, and review the barriers to
obtaining remedies. Lastly, we provide you with our recommendations to the Toronto Police
Service (“TPS”), Toronto Police Service Board (“TPSB”), and Minister of Community Safety
and Correctional Services, summarized below:
A) Use Less Force
1) Strengthen TPS practice guidelines, TPSB policies, and Police Service Act
Regulations on the use of force, including policy and rules about the use of
de-escalation tactics.
2) Create a reporting requirement under the Police Services Act, TPS practice
guidelines, and TPSB policy for any hits to the head or face.
B) Treat Us Equally
3) Create TPS practice guidelines and TPSB policies for when police interact
with youth under age 24. Create a working definition of youth, including
guidelines about youth requiring additional assistance and more opportunities
for pre-charge diversions. Implement definitions and options for pre-charge
diversions into TPS guidelines and TPSB policies.
4) Create and disseminate up-to-date police training about the cognitive and
social functions of young people, including theories of proportional
blameworthiness to maturity level.
3
5) Infuse the Human Rights Code, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms,
and Youth Criminal Justice Act principles into TPS practice guidelines, TPSB
policy, and the Police Services Act Code of Conduct.
C) Respect Our Rights
6) Continue implementation of TPSB policy and TPS procedure requiring police
officers to give individuals a carbon-copy ‘contact receipt’ when stopped by
the police, documenting the reason(s) and nature of the interaction, contact
information for officers involved in the stop, and information about lodging a
complaint if dissatisfied with the interaction.
7) Amend the Police Services Act Code of Conduct to include unlawful stops of
citizens as a violation of the Police Services Act Code of Conduct.
8) Ask the Office of the Independent Police Review Director to open an
investigation into the systemic problem of unlawful detentions and force used
by police against youth, including the use of integrity testing.
D) Be Accountable
9) Amend the Police Services Act so that police officers are mandated to directly
provide an individual with information on how to make a complaint about the
police service if that individual is dissatisfied with the service they receive.
10) Utilize the Toronto Police Service Youth Advisory Committee to assist in the
creation, implementation, and evaluation of practice guidelines and board
policies for when police interact with youth under age 24.
5
4
II. Experiences and Options for Redress
Each participating youth’s affidavit explains their experience with the police. Twenty-six
affidavits were collected, and twenty three were analyzed for this report. Three youth chose to
keep all contents of their affidavits confidential. To protect the identity of the participants, all
names have been changed from the original affidavits. All ages are from the time of the incident,
not time of swearing the affidavit. See the Appendix for a summary and analysis of each
participant’s affidavit. Reviewing each affidavit, we identified shared negative experiences
including use of excessive force, discrimination, breaches of constitutional rights and feelings
that the police officers lacked accountability.
A) Use less force
Elroy, age 11: “he grabbed me by my neck and called me a ‘little fuck.’”1
Oscar, age 16: “at least ten uniformed police officers followed us into the
store and slammed [me] onto the floor.”2
Pasha, age 16: “the cop then snapped off my hat. He hit me with it.”3
Rico, age 15: “I saw the cops get off their bikes and two of them grabbed
the man and threw him to the ground. I saw two of them hit the guy with
their fists and twist the guy’s arm. It looked like it was breaking.”4
Sasha, age 18: “[Officer 1] then punched me in the head and kicked me in
my thigh a number of times.”5
Tyrone, age 20: “Two officers did a level 3 strip search on me and hit me
two more times in my stomach.”6
Felix, age 17: “while the officer was beating me, I looked towards the
other officer and he was backing away with his hands up. That officer’s
face looked like he did not want to be involved with what was
happening.”
1 ELROY Affidavit 5, line 6

2 OSCAR Affidavit 15, lines 6, 9
3 PASHA Affidavit 16, line 13
4 RICO Affidavit 18, line 11
5 SASHA Affidavit 19, line 16
6 TYRONE Affidavit 20, line 22
7 FELIX Affidavit 6, line 9
6
5
Half of the youth expressed concern about the amount of physical force used by officers.
Five youth experienced hits, punches or kicks to the head or face. Other youth described being
tackled upon detention, hit in the stomach, or grabbed by the neck. Based on the participants’
accounts, it is questionable whether the officers were acting within lawful authority when force
was used.
When carrying out their duties, officers are authorized to use force against individuals.
The force used by officers must be necessary for the purpose of doing what they are authorized
to do. TPSB policy help define what necessary force means. When a police officer uses force
resulting in injury requiring medical attention, an officer must file a report detailing the event. 8
Using unnecessary force is considered officer misconduct under the Police Services Act Code of
Conduct.9
Judges help define what is necessary and authorized force. For example, the courts have
found that using handcuffs during an arrest or patting down an individual for safety reasons
during a detention are both necessary and authorized uses of force. Sections 7 and 12 of the
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (“Charter”)10 provide constitutional limits to the
amount of force police officers may use when carrying out their duties. The Supreme Court of
Canada has commented on the seriousness of excessive force used by the police. In R. v.
Nasogaluak, Justice LeBel stated:
The courts must guard against the illegitimate use of power by the police against
members of our society, given its grave consequences.11
Young people concerned about the level of force used against them may lodge a
complaint about the officer’s conduct. Any force beyond what is necessary may be considered an
unlawful or unnecessary use of force and attract a finding of police misconduct. The officer
using unnecessary force may also be criminally or civilly liable for assault and battery against
8 Toronto Police Service Board, Use of Force Policy, October 26, 2000.
9 Police Services Act, RSO 1990, c P.15 General Regulation, O Reg. 268/10, Schedule, section 2(1)(g)(ii).
10 Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada
Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c. 11.
11 R. v. Nasogaluak, 2010 SCC 6, at para 32.
7
the young person. If the officer is found to be violating TPSB policy, this may bolster any
criminal or civil liability. If the young person brings an application to the court, a judge may find
a breach of their section 7 and 12 Charter rights. If a civil lawsuit is successful, the young person
may receive damages. However, a finding of unnecessary or unauthorized force does not
automatically prove a breach of Charter rights, a finding of assault, or a finding of misconduct
under the Police Service Act (“PSA”).12 The threshold of proofs and remedies for each finding
will vary and will take different factors into consideration, including: evidence of damage or
harm experienced, an evaluation of the seriousness of the Charter breach and evidence of malice
or indecent actions on behalf of the officers.
B) Treat us equally
Luis, age 18: “I heard the male cop ask my friend, ‘where are you from?’
I heard my friend answer, ‘Toronto.’ I heard the male cop ask again, ‘no
where are you from?’ […] I heard the male cop say some else, to the
extent like, ‘stop giving me a hard time.’ I heard my friend answer, ‘my
parents are from Central America.’”13
Hideo, age 13: “I heard the male cop say that if he sees my brother in jail,
he would get somebody to rape him.”14
Brison, age 17: “the officers started to mock me”15
Issac, age 16: “An officer told me that he was going to keep me in and
out of jail until I turned eighteen and then find a way to keep me there for
good.”16
Pasha, age 16: “another cop made fun of my scarf. He said, ‘it’s not the
desert, you know.’”17
Half of the participants were concerned with the profane, abusive, or insulting language
used by investigating officers. Almost one quarter of participants reported concerns about being
discriminated against during their interaction with officers. Four youth spoke out about
Services Act, RSO 1990, c P.15 (“PSA”).
12 Police
13 LUISAffidavit 12, lines 17-19
14 HIDEO Affidavit 8, line 11
15 BRISON Affidavit 1, line 15
16 ISSAC Affidavit 9, line 15
8
7
discrimination based on their age, and two youth experienced comments making fun of their
clothing or facial features identifying their cultural background.
The Ontario Human Rights Code18 and the PSA Code of Conduct both condemn
discriminatory conduct. Age is a protected ground of the Human Rights Code, and
discrimination based on age is prohibited by the right to equality, at s. 15 of the Charter. Under
the PSA Code of Conduct, any officer that fails to treat or protect a person equally without
discrimination has committed discreditable conduct.19
The PSA Code of Conduct also prohibits the use of profane, abusive or insulting language
or otherwise uncivil actions towards members of the public.20 Police officers must also abide by
the Youth Criminal Justice Act (“YCJA”)21 by considering the developmental needs and maturity
level of the youth when they provide support and guidance in the prevention of crime.
C) Respect our rights
Hideo, age 13: “I asked to call my mom or a lawyer and the officers told
me that I couldn’t.”22
Brison, age 17: “At my front door the officers brought me into a corner.
The officers started to pull my pants down.”23
Youth, age 17: “the female officer searched me. She forced me to put my
arms in the air and pulled at my bra in a forward position, exposing my
breasts to the public.”24
Eli, age 14: “I was brought to a cell with six other adults in it. I was in
that cell for a few hours. Several times I asked the court officers walking
by if I could be put in a young offenders cell since I was a minor.”25
Issac, age 16: “The officers then grabbed me against my will and
searched my pockets. The officers looked in my backpack.”26
18 Human Rights Code, RSO 1990, c H.19.
19 Supra note 9 at s. 2 (1)(a)(i)
20 Ibid, at s. 2 (1)(a)(i)(v)
21 Youth Criminal Justice Act, SC 2002, c 1.
24 DENISE Affidavit 3, line 15
25 ELI Affidavit 4, line 10-11
9
8
Mohammed, age 14: “we all told the cop that we did not have any
weapons. The cop asked us to take our backpacks off. All of us took our
backpacks off. The cop then looked inside all of our backpacks. He found
no weapons.”27
Luis, age 18: “I gave him two pieces of my identification, my health card
and my student card. […] I saw the officers get back into the cruiser and
drive off. The male officer still had my student identification. […] I went
and picked up my student card at the police division [the next day]. When
it was given to me, it was cut horizontally near the middle of the card.”28
Over three quarters of the youth participating in Changes – The Affidavit Project
reported concerns about their stop, search, or arrest. During their interactions, youth remember
being ridiculed and harassed by officers with racist and other insults and provocations. Three
quarters of the youth felt they were stopped, arrested, or imprisoned by police without cause, and
almost a quarter of participants had concerns about how their property was managed. The youth
identified how the mismanagement or destruction of their property shook their confidence in the
police, creating feelings of mistrust and anger. The experiences shared by the participants
indicate that illegal and unacceptable violations of their constitutional rights and fundamental
freedoms may have been committed by police officers.
The Criminal Code29, the Charter, the PSA, and several other federal, provincial, and
municipal laws contain provisions providing the police with powers to detain, arrest and search
individuals. The TPS and TPSB also have a number of practice guidelines and policies relating
to the treatment of detained and arrested persons to help define the parameters of how arrests,
detentions, and searches are carried out as authorized by law. The Charter gives everyone the
right not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned. The Charter also provides everyone a right to
be informed of the reason for their detention or arrest, and to be informed of their right to speak
to counsel and provided an opportunity to do so. Under the Charter, our privacy is to be
27 MOHAMMED Affidavit 13a, lines 10-11
28 LUIS Affidavit 12, lines 13, 33-4, 38
29 Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c C-46.
10
9
respected because everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizures.
Youth have additional rights under the YCJA.30
III. Barriers to Redress
Though participating youth in the Changes – The Affidavit Project had some options for
legal redress, both social and structural barriers act as strong deterrents from consideration of
legal recourse. Nearly all of the participants were unwilling or unable to engage with the formal
complaints system, expressing fear about speaking up and feelings of hopelessness that they
would not be believed. Participants explained that fear, lack of trust, lack of monetary resources,
and lack of social support were some reasons why they would be unable to engage in any formal
complaint or legal process.
Even youth willing to engage in a legal process to seek redress would be met with
challenges. The Human Rights Code, PSA, and our courts provide mechanisms for hearing
grievances, but the collection and presentation of evidence and thresholds of proof are sometimes
difficult to meet. Youth generally have little or no money to pay for legal counsel up front. If
they are able to retain counsel, a small monetary award may be less than the legal fees required
to bring the claim to court. In the complaints process, the youth may be dissatisfied with the
disciplinary action taken against an officer that hurt them. In both complaints and court
processes, a youth may also be re-victimized through the adversarial dispute resolution system
opening them up to attacks on their credibility or recounting of events.
Because legal avenues for redress present overwhelming barriers to youth, negative
interactions with police increased the participants’ feelings of hopelessness, distrust and
bitterness towards the police. Police services have the power and resources to improve relations
and bolster credibility amongst youth. If the TPS take a proactive approach to address feelings of
30 Supra note 21 at s. 25, 29, 30(3). For example, the YCJA mandates that youth be held separate from adults during
detention when possible, that their parents be contacted and that they be able to exercise their right to instruct
counsel at any time during proceedings against them. A youth who has been charged with an offence cannot be held
in detention in place of another social measure or for the purpose of child protection
11
10
discrimination and vulnerability, it is likely that our youths’ feelings of mistrust towards law
enforcement officers will be reduced.
Changes – The Affidavit Project participants ask the TPS to strengthen the trust youth
have in the police by providing more information about why a stop occurred, and better
accountability measures to reduce unlawful stops and searches. Implementing Ontario Human
Rights Code and YCJA standards of care to address violence, discrimination, and rightsviolations
is essential. Infusing standards into practice guidelines, policies and the PSA Code of
Conduct may, in turn, improve youth and police interactions. The next section defines the
participants’ requests for change, and makes recommendations to more effectively prevent crime
and violence in our City while reducing police violence, discrimination, and rights-violations.
IV. Requests for Change
A) Use less force
Grant, age 13: “I think that the police should treat young people less
rough. Police should be less violent”.31
Rico, age 15: “I wish the police were not so violent with young people.”32
Issac, age 16: “I think police officers need to change in how they interact
with youth. I find they use their fists before their voices, and I think that
is wrong.”33
The TPS should adopt more stringent standards aimed at reducing instances of violence.
One suggestion is to strengthen the TPSB’s existing policies so that any hits, kicks, or punches to
the head are reported. Blows to the head and face have potential to cause permanent damage that
is not always initially apparent. Young persons’ brains continue to grow and develop into their
31 GRANT Affidavit 7, line 9 and in interview March 11, 2011
32 RICO Affidavit 18, line 15
12
11
adolescence and early adult years.34 Young persons may be particularly vulnerable to
complications from head injuries as their brains continue to grow.35
We recommend that the TPS implement a practice guideline mandating violence deescalation
tactics to be used when police are interacting with youth. With training in violence deescalation
techniques, blows to the face and head can be avoided. Less violence would decrease
fear and more readily open channels of communication when crime prevention or serious crime
investigations are underway.
B) Treat us equally
Hideo, age 13: “I think that the way cops talk to people needs to change.
It was really disgusting that they said they would get someone to rape my
brother.”36
Mohammed, age 14: “I think that police need to talk more politely and
treat people right.”37
Pasha, age 16: “I think that the way police treat teenagers needs to
change. I think police make assumptions about the way young people
look, and we end up getting harassed.”38
Kiesha, age 16: “I think the way that police stereotype the youth needs to
change. I feel they always think youth are up to no good. Based on my
experience, I believe they abuse their power when relating to youth.”39
Elroy, age 11: “I think that the way youth are treated by police needs to
change. Youth need to be treated like youth, not adults.”40
Luis, age 18: “I think that police should get used to people that are mixed
(race).”41
34 C.
Lebel, C. Beaulieu, “Longitudinal Development of Human Brain Wiring Continues from Childhood into
Adulthood” (2011) 31(30) Journal of Neuroscience 10937 at 10943.
35 Forexample, see: Tammy Balaban, Nellemarie Hyde & Angela Colantonio, “The Effects of Traumatic
Brain Injury During Adolescence on Career Plans and Outcomes” (2009) 29(4) Physical and
Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics 367-383.
37 MOHAMMED Affidavit 13b, line 14
39 KIESHA Affidavit 11, line 11
40 ELROY Affidavit 5, line 9
41 LUIS, in interview November 16, 2010
13
12
We suggest that the TPS implement a working definition of youth that includes youth up
to age 24. Most youth services in the City of Toronto serve youth ages 16 to 24, and many
government programs including city employment programs define youth up to age 29. Though
the YCJA defines youth as under 18, research in cognitive science explains that the frontal lobe
of the brain is often still growing into a young persons early to mid 20’s.42 The frontal lobe is
important to reasoning, problem solving and memory, especially during times of stress. 43
Policing practices and policies should tailor services to youth that accommodate their
developmental stages, and align with other government youth services.
Changes - The Affidavit Project participants’ requests for the police to be more polite
and speak more respectfully may best be achieved by creating practice guidelines and policies
that take into consideration the vulnerabilities and developmental needs of youth. These practice
guidelines and policies should include:
a robust definition of youth as persons up to age 24;
recognition of age discrimination and the vulnerabilities of youth including the higher
rates of victimization experienced by marginalized youth;44
techniques of de-escalation and problem solving when interacting with youth;
more opportunities for pre-charge diversions45 and;
42 Supra note 35.
43Heather M. Conklin et al., “Working Memory Performance in Typically Developing Children and Adolescents:
Behavioral Evidence of Protracted Frontal Lobe Development” (2007) 31(1) Developmental Neuropsychology 103-
128; Maria Roca et al., “The Role of Area 10 (BA10) in Human Multi-tasking and in Social Cognition: A Lesion
Study” (2011) 49(13) Neuropsychologia 3525-3531.
44 See: Stephen Gaetz, Bill O’Grady & Kristy Buccieri, “Surviving Crime and Violence: Street Youth and
Victimization in Toronto” (2010) Homeless Hub. A similar recommendation was made by the Youth Alliance of
the Metropolitan Action Committee on Violence Against Women’s (METRAC). The Youth Alliance conducted
research that identified strengths, challenges and gaps in police policies and procedures and made recommendations
for improvement. Their report asked for police services to incorporate a unique definition of youth into policies and
practices, so to breed consistency in practices geared towards youth. The report asked to define youth not just by age
but also by recognizing the increased victimization that young people who experience marginalization face,
including youth women, youth living or working on the street, racialized youth, youth living in poverty, youth with
disabilities and youth who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, intersex and two-spirited. See: Youth
Alliance, “Improving the System: Police Policy and Practice on Sexual Assault Against Young Women” (2011)
METRAC.
45 The YCJA lays the blueprint for encouraging diversions out of the criminal justice system. Many steps can be
taken by police services to reduce laying charges against youth. For example, s. 6 of the Act requires a police officer
to consider the use of a warning, caution or referral before starting judicial proceedings or taking any other measures
14
13
stronger penalties for the use of profane and abusive language with youth.
C) Respect our rights
Brison, age 17: “I think that the police should not be able to just ask our
names anytime and force us to give us our names, and then start to search
all my body. Just a few days ago, the police did this to me. I feel like this
violates my rights as a person.”46
C.J., age 14: “I want the police to stop stopping me on the street and
searching me.”47
Luis, age 18: “I believe the police should only pull me over if I am doing
something wrong.”48
Denise, age 17: “I think that the officers should have investigated a lot
more before they busted through our doors, hurt us, broke, and lost our
belongings. I think that when people are being cooperative, like we were
being, that the officers should have respected our belongings more and
been more humane to us.”49
Mohammed, age 14: “I think police should stop disrespecting people and
inform people of their rights.”50
Analyzing the participants’ experiences identified some gaps in accountability related to
police stops. For example, the PSA Code of Conduct includes misconduct for unlawful arrests or
unnecessary force,51 but makes no mention of unlawful or arbitrary detentions, nor any reference
to misconduct for Charter breaches. Protection against arbitrary detention is a fundamental right
in the Charter. Infusing this protected right into the PSA Code of Conduct is necessary to address
complaints related to this violation, and to help prevent unlawful and harmful interactions
leading from unlawful or arbitrary stops.
under the YCJA. This legal requirement should be adopted into Toronto Police Service guidelines and TPSB policy,
including in guidelines and policy about interactions with youth.
47 C.J Affidavit 2, line 12
48 LUIS Affidavit 12, line 42
49 DENISE Affidavit 3, line 32
50 MOHAMMED, in interview November 16, 2010
51 PSA Code of Conduct, supra note 9 at s. 2(1)(g)(i)
15
14
The prevalence of participants concerned about their stops and searches by police warns
us that the issue may be widespread, warranting a larger scale investigation by the Office of the
Independent Police Review Director (”OIPRD”). Review of police practices by the OIPRD or
TPSB that include integrity testing52 may assist to impartially survey procedures, leading to an
effective review and increased accountability of the police.
D) Be accountable
Eli, age 14: “I think the police should question their orders if they are
against the law. They need to follow the law, not orders. They kept
saying, ‘I’m just following orders.’”53
Felix, age 17: “I think that the law should be changed so that it is easier
for the police to get in trouble or be charged for the wrong things that
they do.”54
C.J., age 14: “I want the police to stop having so many patrols because
the officers scare me. They have weapons and ask a lot of questions.”55
Eli, age 14: “I think that there needs to be more qualified police officers
to do their job.”56
The current status of policing oversight does not give youth much confidence. The
OIPRD published a 2010-11 report outlining the process and outcomes of public complaints. In
total, 4,083 complaints were received from January 2009 to March 2011. Between April 2010
and March 2011, only 10 less serious conduct violations and 26 serious conduct violations were
referred to a disciplinary hearing.57 The TPS 2011 Statistical Report holds similarly low findings
of any misconduct among police members. In 2010, the TPS received 1,147 complaints, and
investigated 740 of them. 131 investigations are not concluded. The report cites a mere 30
52 Integrity testing was suggested by another affidavit-based review of police interactions in Vancouver, Canada.
See: PIVOT Legal Society, “To Serve and Protect: A Report on Policing in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside”
(2005) PIVOT Legal Society.
53 ELI, in interview November 9, 2010
54 FELIX Affidavit 6, line 13
55 C.J Affidavit 2, line 11
56 ELI Affidavit 4, line 18
57 Office of the Independent Police Review Director, Making Connections 2010-11 Annual Report (Toronto,
Ontario) at 27.
15
findings of misconduct identified, representing 5% of those investigated.58 The low probability
of a young person’s complaint leading to discipline decreases their motivation to enter into the
formal complaints system through the OIPRD or the police service.
One method of encouraging feedback and engagement with the complaints process is to
require officers to provide an individual, at the point of contact, with information on how to
make a complaint about the police service. Open sharing of information could be modified for
some police activities such as undercover operations and emergencies. As an enhancement to the
community policing model, an open and transparent understanding of the officer’s role and the
individual’s ability to complain about poor service would be helpful to both the police and
community members. Youth will benefit from accessibility to the complaints process, and police
will benefit by bolstering trust with youth by providing transparent and accountable policing of
the community.
V. Conclusion
“Society must feel safe in that the police are being held accountable at
least to the same standards as individual community members.”
Community youth worker, 2011
Changes – The Affidavit Project participants expressed feelings of anger, sadness,
mistrust and fear of future contact with the police resulting from their previous experiences with
police. Experiences of injustice and hurt took the form of excessive force, discrimination,
unlawful treatment upon detention, and damage to personal property. Through their experiences,
16
the youth asked for four things to change:

A) Use Less Force
B) Treat Us Equally
C) Respect our Rights
D) Be Accountable
58 Toronto Police Service, 2011 Annual Statistical Report (Toronto, Ontario) at 11.
16
The long-term goal of Changes – The Affidavit Project is to effect change in how youth
and police interact. We thank the participants who gave their time and energy to share their
personal experiences and thoughtfully brainstormed ideas on ‘what needs to change.’ The
recommendations outlined in this report can be used as frameworks for action plans addressing
what needs to change. Action plans may involve civic participation through deputations to the
Toronto Police Service Board, lobbying the government for law reforms, public relations with
other communities and the media, and programs with the Toronto Police Service. Addressing use
of force, discrimination, rights-violations, and police accountability will take steps towards
repairing harms and enhance trust between youth and police, so that we may work together to
improve health, safety and security within our communities.
17
VI. Glossary and Appendix
Glossary
OIPRD Office of the Independent Police Review Director
17
Affidavits most commonly used:

1. Affidavit to be Submitted with the Application for Change
of Name in The Certificate Due to Marriage
The Registrar,
______________ University
Affidavit of Miss.___________ D/o, of Mr. _______ now Mrs. ___________, wife of
Mr_______________, aged _____ years, resident of _______________.
I, the above named deponent, solemnly affirm and state as under:
1. That I am the applicant in the application being submitted for the change in name
and as such I am fully conversant with the facts deposed to below.
2. That I pursued and passed three years Bachelors Degree in Commerce (Hons.),
Course from ________________College, affiliated to your University under name
Miss.___________from the year ____ to ______under roll No.____________.
3. That my marriage was solemnized with Mr.__________, on ____________, That
due to different surname of my husband, my name has changed from Miss.
________________ to Mrs. __________________ .
4. That I have been selected and appointed on probation as Section Officer in
________________ and the appointing authority has advised me to submit the
Certificate confirming change of my name.
5. That I, now addressed under my changed name as Mrs. _______________ is one
and the same person as Miss_________ before my marriage with Mr.
________________ was solemnized.
6. That it is necessary to issue the Certificate in the changed name.
DEPONENT
Signed at _____________ this ___ day of ____,
VERIFICATION
I, ________ the above named deponent do hereby verify on oath that the contents of the
affidavit above are true to my personal knowledge and nothing material has been concealed
or falsely stated.
DEPONENT
2. Regional Transport Authority for Issuance of Duplicate

Driving Licence
Before the Regional Transport Officer, ___________________, New Delhi.

Affidavit of Mr./Ms._______,S/o./D/o., Sh.____________ aged_____ years,Resident of
_________________ .
18
1. That I am the applicant in the application for the issue of duplicate driving licence
and as such fully conversant with the facts deposed to below.
2. That I was issued driving licence no.________ on _________ by your office to
drive Scooter and Jeep with gears.
3. That my driving licence no. ____________ has been lost on or about
__________, for which I have lodged FIR with Police Station, __________vide
FIR No. _________ dated _____________.
4. That I have not deposited the said driving license with any Court or any other public
authority.
5. That my licence has not been cancelled and no charge sheet has been filed against me
for any offence under the Motor Vehicles Act or Rules made thereunder or any other
law for the time being in force.
6. That I am otherwise qualified to hold the driving licence.
7. That if the original licence will be found, I undertake to deposit the same with your
office.
8. That in view of the above, it is necessary that duplicate driving licence be issued to
me.
DEPONENT
Signed at _____________ this ___day of ____,
VERIFICATION
I, ________the above named deponent do hereby verify on oath that the contents of the
or falsely stated.
DEPONENT
3. Affidavit to be Furnished by The Shareholder to the

Company For Issuance of Duplicate Share Certificate (S)
The Board of Directors,

_________________ Limited/ Private Limited,
Regd. Office:_________________
Affidavit of Mr./Ms.________________, S/o/D/o, of Mr. _______ aged about
_________ years, resident of _______________.
1. That I am the applicant in the application being submitted for issuance of duplicate
Equity share certificate(s) and as such I am fully conversant with the facts deposed to
below.
1. That ____ Equity shares of the face value of Rs. 10/- each fully paid-up as per details
given hereunder stand registered in my name in the books of
19
_____________Limited/ Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as "the

Company").
Certificate No. No. of Shares Distinctive No(s).
------ ---- -------
1. That the certificate (s) in respect of the aforesaid Equity shares has been lost from my
custody and is not forthcoming.
2. That the certificate(s) in respect of the aforesaid Equity shares were not accompanied
by any blank transfer deed(s) signed by me and that I have not, nor has any person by
my order or on my behalf or in any other manner disposed off, parted with the said
Equity share certificate(s)or assigned our interests therein or part thereof to any
person.
3. That notwithstanding our diligent efforts, we have not been able to trace/locate the
said share certificate(s).
4. That we have requested the Company to issue in our names, duplicate share
certificate(s) in lieu of the aforesaid share certificate.
5. We solemnly verify that the facts stated above are true and nothing material has been
concealed.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
I, ________the above named deponent, do hereby verify on oath that the contents of the
or falsely stated.
DEPONENT
4. Affidavit for Condonation of Delay in Filing Appeal

Before The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
Before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal at _______________

In the matter of _____________Limited/Private Limited,
Assessment Year ___________
Affidavit of Mr./Ms. _____________aged____ years, Director of_________
Limited/Private Limited.
That I the above named deponent, am well conversant with the facts deposed to below.
1. That the appeal filed by the Assessee Company before the Dy. Commissioner
(Appeals) was disposed of by order dated___________ passed by Dy.
Commissioner (Appeals) _______________________.
2. That the time for filing of the appeal before the Tribunal was to expire on _______.
3. That the Attorney/Advocate of the Assessee company Mr.__________ was coming
to the office of the Tribunal to file Memorandum of appeal duly signed by the
20
Managing Director of the Company on_______________ by taxi bearing no.

_____ and that due to big procession on the occasion of
__________________________ and consequent traffic blockage on the way, he
could not reach the Tribunal Office in time and therefore appeal could not be filed.
4. That the memo of Appeal has been filed on ________ in the Office of the Tribunal.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
or falsely stated.
DEPONENT
5. Affidavit to be Furnished to The Income Tax Authorities

for obtaining Income Tax Clearance Certificate
Affidavit of Mr/Ms._______ S/o,/D/o Mr._____ aged___ years, resident of

_____________.
I, the above named deponent, solemnly affirm and declare as under:
1. That I am fully conversant with the facts deposed to below.
2. That I am holder of Indian Passport bearing No. _________dated _______.
3. That I am permanent resident of _____________.
4. That my sources of income are Income from Salary, Income from business and
Income from House Property.
5. That I am duly filing my income tax returns and have paid all my tax liabilities on my
total income till the Assessment Year _________
6. That I have no other source of income.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
or falsely stated.
DEPONENT
6. Affidavit to be Furnished to The Registrar of Marriages

Under Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
21
Affidavit of Mr ________ S/o, Mr._______ aged___ years, resident of ____________.

1. That I am fully conversant with the facts deposed to below.
2. That my marriage with Mrs.__________(Bride) was solemnized on _________ at
New Delhi.
3. That my date of birth is ____________.
4. That prior to this marriage I was unmarried/legal divorcee.
5. That I_____________ (Bridegroom) and Mrs. _____________ (Bride) are not
related to each other within the prohibited degree of relationship as per Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955.
6. That I am a Citizen of the Republic of India.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
or falsely stated.
DEPONENT
7. Affidavit to be Submitted with a Writ Petition
Before the Hon'ble High Court of Juridicture at _______________

Writ Petition No.____________ of __________
Mr________ aged ____years, S/o Mr. _________ resident of _______________
…..……….……….Petitioner
1. Union of India through its Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India,
New Delhi.
2. District Magistrate, __________________
….…………. Opposite Parties
Affidavit of Mr/Ms.________ S/o/D/o, Mr._______ aged___ years, resident of
_____________
I, the above named deponent, solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:
5. That I am the Petitioner in the above mentioned writ petition and am fully
conversant with the facts deposed to in the Writ Petition.
6. That the contents of paragraphs ______ to _______ of the accompanying writ
petition are true to my personal knowledge and the contents of paragraphs ____ to _____
are based on legal advice, which I believe to be true. No material has been concealed and no
part is false.
7. That the Annexure No(s). 1 to 10 to the accompanying writ petition are true copies of
the originals and I have compared the said Annexures with their respective originals and
certify them to be true copies thereof.
22
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
or falsely stated.
DEPONENT
8. Affidavit with the Application for Amending The Wealth

Tax Return Under Wealth Tax Act, 1957
Before the Wealth Tax Officer, ___________________
I, the above named deponent, solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:
Affidavit of Mr./Ms.___________ S/o/D/o, of ________ aged _______ resident of
____________________.
1. That I am well conversant with the facts deposed to below.
2. That I am the Assessee in the aforesaid case and as such fully conversant with the
facts deposed to below.
3. That I have filed the return of wealth tax for the assessment year _______ on
_____________.
4. That in the said return, the particulars of securities held by me have been wrongly
given. And the mistake is inadvertent.
5. That the particulars of securities held by me have been given in the list attached
herewith.
6. That the mistake came to notice when my Consultant saw the papers in connection
with the production of evidence before the Wealth Tax Officer, ________.
7. That in view of the above, it is requested that the return of wealth tax may be
amended and particulars of securities held by me given in the said return may be
substituted with the list attached herewith.
DEPONENT
Signed at _____________ this ___ day of ____,
VERIFICATION
or falsely stated.
DEPONENT
23
TEMPORARY INJUNCTION
1] The law relating to injunction has been provided in
the Specific Relief Act. Injunction may be Permanent Injunction or
Temporary Injunction. Section 37 of Specific Relief Act provides
that "temporary Injunction are such as are to continue until a
specified time, or until the further order of the court, and they
may be granted at any stage of a suit." Section 94(c) and (e) of
the Code of Civil Procedure contains provisions under which the
Court may in order to prevent the ends of justice from being
defeated grant a temporary injunction or make such other
interlocutory orders as may appears to the Court to be just and
convenient. The procedure for seeking temporary injunction has
been provided under O. 39 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
However, an injunction being discretionary equitable relief
cannot be granted when equally efficacious relief is obtainable in
any other usual mode or proceeding.
Object of Temporary Injunction :
2] The object of the interlocutory injunction is to
protect the plaintiff against injury by violation of his right for
which he could not be adequately compensated in damages
recoverable in the action if the uncertainty were resolved in his
favour at the trial. Gujarat Bottling Co. Ltd. vs. Coca Cola
Company 1995(5) SCC 545.
Ingredients
3] It is well settled that for grant of temporary
injucntion three factors have to be satisfied which are prima
facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss. In
Dalpat Kumar V/s Pralhad Singh, AIR 1993 SC 276,
Hon'ble Apex Court explained these three factors as follows:-
1/29
i] There is a serious disputed question to be tried in the
court and that an act, on the facts before the court, there is
probability of his being entitled to the relief asked for by the
plaintiff/defendant.
ii] The Court's interference is necessary to protect the
party from the species of injury. In other words irreparable
injury or danger would ensue before the legal right would be
established at trial and
iii] That the comparative hardship on mischief or
inconvenience which is likely to occur from withholding the
injunction will be greater than that would be likely to acted from
granting it.
Prima facie case
4] Prima facie case does not mean that the plaintiff should
have a cent percent case which will in all probability succeed in
24
trial. Prima facie case means that the contentions which the
plaintiff is raising, require consideration in merit and are not
liable to be rejected summarily
{ Prakash Singh V/s State of Haryana 2002 (4) Civil L.J.
71 (P.H.) }
Balance of Convenience :
5] To see balance of convenience, it is necessary to
compare case of parties, comparative mischief or inconvenience
which is likely to sue from withholding the injunction will be
grater than which is likely to arrive from granting it.
Irreparable loss :
6] There are many injuries incapable of being repaired but a
court of equity does not regard them as 'irreparable'. For
example cause which outrage the feeling or loss of things of
sentimental value. On the other hand there are injuries which in
their nature may be repaired but still treated as irreparable. For
2/29
example a person who is inflicting or threatening them is
insolvent or unable to pay damages. Ordinarily injury is
irreparable when without fair and reasonable address of Court, it
would be denial of justice. Very often an injury is irreparable
where it is continuous and repeated or where it is remediable at
law only by a multiplicity of suits. Sometime the term
irreparable damage refers to the difficulty of measuring the
amount of damages inflicted. However, a mere difficulty in
proving injury does not establish irreparable injury.
7] A temporary injunction can be granted only if the
person seeking injunction has a concluded right, capable of
being enforced by way of injunction (Agricultural Produce
Market Committee Vs. Girdharbhai Ramjibhai Chhaniyara
– AIR 1997 SC 2674)
Ad-Interim Injunctions:-
8] Ad-interim injunctions only reflects that court either
passed order ex-parte or even if the defendant is present, he
was not heard fully for want of pleading etc. In Morgan Stanley
Mutual Fund Vs. Kartick Das – (1994) 4 SCC 225, it was
observed as follows:-
• Where irreparable or extremely serious injury will be
caused to the applicant, ex-parte order can be passed;
• The court shall examine the time when the plaintiff got
notice of the act complained;
• If the plaintiff has acquiesced to the conduct of the
respondent then ex-parte temporary injunction shall not be
passed;
• The applicant shall be acting in utmost good faith; and
• Such an order shall be for a temporary period.
3/29
Status-quo -
9] Status-quo and injunction are not identical, however,
primary purpose of injunction is to preserve the matter in
25
status-quo. Therefore, status-quo should not be granted

where there is no prima facie cas ( Nagorao ..vs..
Nagpur Improvement Trust, AIR 2001 Bombay, 402).
Generally, when Court orders for status-quo, Court should
specify the context in which or condition subject to which,
such statusquo direction is issued.
Care for Ad-interim Order
10] Due care and cautions should be taken for granting
or refusing injunctions. Safer course would be to give short
notice to other side and then to pass order after hearing both the
sides. In case of need, ad-interim injunction should be for short
period with condition to give undertaking to pay realistic costs
and to pay mesne profits etc. (Maria Margadia Sequaria v/s
Erasmo Takl De Sequaria 2012(5) SCC 370: AIR 2012 SC
1727).
Equity -
11] Injunction is an equitable remedy as well as it is
governed by law. Therefore, equitable principles are of very
much importance in granting or rejecting injunction. Equitable
principle is that, he who seeks equity must come with clean
hands. In an authority, 2003(2) ALL M.R. 254 Bom. , it was
held that, one must come with clean hands to claim the
discretionary relief of injunction. In the authority of
Harcharanjit Singh Thind..vs.. Diksha Thind 2008 (3)
Mah.L.J. 587, it was held that relief of temporary injunction is a
discretionary and equitable and so the party who suppressed the
material fact from the Court, does not deserve to get any
4/29
discretionary relief much less an order of temporary injunction.
The principle of equity that, he who seeks equity must do equity.
This principle is to be borne in mind while deciding the
application for temporary injunction. Equitable principle, “Delay
defeats equity” is very much important while deciding the adinterim
ex-parte injunction. Equitable principle of 'party cannot
take disadvantage of his own wrong' is also very important.
Another important principle of equity is that, 'where there is
right, there is a remedy'. This very much useful while invoking
Sec. 151 of C.P.C. Of inherent power of Court. Where permanent
injunction has not been sought for in the suit itself, no interim
preventive injunction can be granted.
Discretionary relief
12] Injunction is a discretionary remedy. The court is not
bound to grant such relief merely because it is lawful to do so.
But the discretion of the court is not arbitrary but sound and
reasonable guided by judicial principles . (Ganesh Daivajna Vs
prakash 2000(3) Mh. L.J. 347). The exercise of discretion
must be in a judicial manner depending on the circumstances of
each case. No hard and fast rule can be laid down for the
guidance of courts as regards the exercise of such discretion.
(Harcharanjit Vs Deeksha 2008(3)Mh.L.J. 587 Bombay
26
High Court)
Imposition of terms :
13] After perusal of Order 39 and rule thereunder, no
where it is specifically stated that, while granting temporary
injunction, court may impose some conditions. However, the
court may impose terms in exercise of its discretionary
jurisdiction. Injunctive relief is of discretionary nature and the
court passing an order for a temporary injunction, could regulate
its exercise of discretion by imposing terms for protecting
5/29
legitimate right of the parties. Court can take undertaking from
either party or take security to comply the undertaking. While
exercising discretionary power, the court should also adopt the
procedure of calling upon the plaintiff to file a bond to the
satisfaction of the court that in the event of his failing in the suit
to obtain the relief asked for in the plaint, he would adequately
compensate the defendant for the loss ensued due to the Order
of injunction granted in favour of plaintiff. Court can impose
suitable conditions while granting ad-interim injunctions (Vascon
Engineers Ltd. v/s Sansara Hotels Indra Pvt. Ltd 2009 (4)
Mh.L.J. 859 )
Time Limit to dispose off -
14] When court grant ad-interim injunction it should be
finally decided within thirty days. However, if that application is
not decided within thirty days then also order of ad-interim
injunction remain in force. However court should passed order in
writing as to cause of delay failing which it becomes appealable.
Then appellate court can change that order with further direction
to take appropriate action against that presiding judge of trial
court (Venkatsubbiah Naidu v/s S. Chellappan and ors AIR
2000 SC 3032).
Short Duration
15] Court should be careful in granting ad-interim injunction
as there can be danger of fake pleading or concealment of
material facts and even forged documents being relied on to get
relief of ad-interim injunction. So it is desirable to give effects of
ad-interim injunction up to a week and court can impose
conditions that in case suit is dismissed, the plaintiff or the
defendants will have to pay full restitution, actual or realistic
costs or mesne profits (Rameshwari Devi V/s Nirmala Devi
and Others 2011 AIR SCW 4000). Similar is the ratio in
6/29
Subhash Kirshna Kanitkar Vs Bhiwandi Nizampura
Municipal Council & Others,2001(1) Bom.CR. 251,
Cases in which temporary Preventive injunction may be
granted.
16] Order 39 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure.- 1)
When any property in dispute is in danger, 2) When any property
in dispute is being wasted, 3) When any property in dispute is
damaged, 4) When any property in dispute is alienated by any
27
party, 5) When any property in dispute is wrongfully sold in

execution of a decree, 6) when defendant threatens, 7) when
defendant intends to remove, 8) when defendant dispose of his
property with a view to defrauding his creditor, 9) when
defendant threatened to dispossess the plaintiff, 10) when
defendant otherwise cause injury to the plaintiff in relation to
any property in dispute in a suit, 11) where defendant is about to
commit a breach of contract or other injury of any kind, 12)
where a court is of the opinion that in the interest of just so
requires.
17] Section 38 of Specific Relief Act shows that perpetual
injunction can be granted to the plaintiff to prevent breach of an
obligation existing in his favour, 2) when any such an obligation
is arises from contract, 3) Defendants invades or threatens to
invade the plaintiff right to enjoyment of property, a) in case of
a) defendant is trustee of plaintiff b) where there is no standard
to ascertain actual damage caused or likely to be caused by the
invasion, c) where invasion is such that compensation in money
would not afford adequate relief d) where injunction is necessary
to prevent multiplicity of judicial proceedings.
7/29
Injunction when cannot be granted -
18] An injunction cannot be granted to- (a) restrain any
person from prosecuting a judicial proceeding at the institution
of the suit, in which injunction is sought, unless restraint is
necessary to prevent multiplicity of proceeding. (b) to restrain
any person from instituting or prosecuting any proceeding in a
Court not subordinate to that, from which injunction is sought.
(c) to restrain any person from applying to any legislative body,
(d) to restrain any person from instituting or prosecuting any
proceeding in a criminal matter, (e) to prevent the breach of a
contract the performance of which could not be specifically
enforced. (f) to prevent on the ground of nuisance, and act of
which it is not reasonably clear that it will be a nuisance. (g) to
prevent a continuing breach in which the plaintiff has
acquiesced, (h) when equally efficacious relief can be certainly
be obtained by any other usual mode of proceeding except in
case of breach of trust, (I) when conduct of the plaintiff or his
agents has been such as to disentitle him to the assistance of
the Court. (j) when the plaintiff has no personal interest in the
matter.
Injunction against alienation and creation of third party
interest
19] A injunction against alienation is a court order which
prevents a party from disposing of or dealing with its assets.
Usually an application for such injunction is made when the
applicant fears that the other party will dispose of its assets
before judgment can be obtained and enforced. However, a
freezing injunction can be sought at any time – during the course
of proceedings and after judgment has been obtained (to
28
prevent the disposal of assets before the judgment is enforced).

8/29
20] In the case of Shobha Developers Ltd. .Vs. Lanka
Sitaram Kamthe and others 2014(3) Mh.LJ. 445, the
plaintiff,claiming share in family property, sought injunction
against defendants from alienating and creating third party
interest. But an agreement for development of property was
already entered and development of property was also started
and right of third party was created. It was held that developing
property cannot cause prejudice to plaintiff and so not entitled to
injunction.
Injunction in suit for specific performance to sale
property
21] In case of M/S Kachhi Properties ..VS.. All
Residents 2010 (5) Bom. C. R. 43, it has been observed as
follows:
(a) Section 52 of the TP Act provides adequate protection to
the parties from transfers pendente lite and such
transferees are neither required to be impleaded nor can
claim impleadment. They cannot even resist execution
proceedings.
(b) plaintiff's could (or rather ought to) have notices of their
suits registered under section 18 of the Indian Registration
Act, They cannot seek to restrain adversary by an
injunction by refusing to go in for registration of the lis.
(c) There is power of court to issue injunction but it must be
exercises such power if protection provided by Section 52
of the TP Act is shown to be inadequate.
(d) In the face of protection provided by Section 52 of the TP
Act, Courts should be cautious in examining the claims by
plaintiff's of irreparable loss injunction to restrain
alienations is refused.
9/29
(e) Courts should consider who would face greater
inconvenience
(f) Courts may impose suitable conditions (like seeking
undertaking that no equities would be claimed, on account
of sale/development of properties effecting sale only after
putting transferee's to notice that their rights would be
subject to suit etc., Interests of prospective purchasers
would also be protected if plaintiff's in such cases register
the lis, though may be optional.)
22] The transfer made in violence of section 52 of
T.P. Act does not become availed, whereas transfer made in
violation of T.I. is illegal. Alienation against prohibitory order of
court confers no right, title or interest on the transferee as its no
transfer in the eyes of law. Hence effect is that transaction is
illegal Keshrimal Shah ..VS.. Bank of Maharashtra 2004 [3]
Mh L J 893 The same view is taken in T.G.Ashok Kumar..VS..
Govindammal and another 2011[1] All M R 462
29
&Hardevsingh.VS. Gurmalsingh 2007[2] SCC444.

Coparcener :
23] In the case of Sunil Kumar and Anr. v. Ram
Parkash and Ors., AIR 1988 SC 576 the Hon'ble Apex Court
has observed that karta is the best person as to how the joint
family estate could be beneficially put into use to subserve the
interests of the family. A coparcener cannot interfere in these
acts of management. Apart from that a father karta in addition to
the aforesaid powers of alienation has also the special power to
sell or mortgage ancestral property to discharge his antecedent
debt which is not tainted with immorality. If there is no such need
or benefit, the purchaser takes risk and the right and interest of
coparcener will remain unimpaired in the alienated property.
Therefore, he cannot move the Court to grant relief by injunction
10/29
restraining the karta from alienating the coparcenary property.
The coparcener has adequate remedy to impeach the alienation
made by the karta.
Co-owner
24] Co-owner who is not in a possession of any part of
the property cannot seek an injunction against another co-owner
unless any act of the person in possession of the property causes
prejudice or is adverse to the interest of the co-owner who is in
possession. Ashok Bansal and others..Vs..Guru Das and
others 2002 (4) Civil LJ 891.
Co-sharer
25] The plaintiff in a suit for partition is entitled to get a
temporary injunction even against his co-sharers to protect his
possession when he is exclusively residing in the suit houses and
carrying on business thereon – I P Bhankanarayana v/s P
Rajeshwar Rao AIR 1991 Ori 92. When a stranger Purchaser
threatens to entered into joint possession with members of the
undivided family temporary injunction should be granted
restraining him from entering into possession even if such an
order amounts to eviction of the stranger purchaser – Ashim
Ranjan Das v/s Bimla Ghosh AIR 1992 Cal 44. When the
purchaser of undivided interest of coparcenary property is in
possession of a portion of a joint property he can compel the non
alienating members not to dispossesses him without recourse of
law. Therefore, the grant of equitable relief to protect his
possession till the filing of the suit for joint partition and a suit for
mandatory injunction is permissible(Maharai v/s Dhansai 1992
MP 220. ).
Injuction to protect easmentary right and akin rights
26] When the legal right of easement and the facts of its
disturbance is established, permanent injunction is required to
11/29
be granted even without the proof of substantial damage in
order to avoid multiplicity of proceeding (Sarablal Za V/s.
Ucheshawar, AIR 1972, Patna 490)
30
Injunction to protect Grazing rights :-

27] Grazing rights is customary right. In Govind Kallar
V/s. Ganga Ram, AIR 1934 Nagpur 137, the Hon'ble Bombay
High Court held that, the Malguzar is bound to leave land for
grazing proposed.
Injunction to protect Right regarding burial ground :-
28] In Varkey V/s. Sant Merry, reported in AIR 1997,
Kerala, 337, the right to bury the dead in a particular place in
the Church is recognized.
Injunction relating to possession / dispossession/
restoration of possession of immovable prpoerty
29] In Anathula Sudhakar V/s P. Buchi Reddy
reported in 2008(4) SCC 594 held that :-
1)Where a plaintiff is in lawful or peaceful possession of a
property and such possession is interfered or threatened by
the defendant, suit for an injunction simplicitor will lie. A
person has a right to protect his possession against any
person who does not prove a better title by seeking a
prohibitory injunction. But a person in wrongful possession is
not entitled to an injunction against the rightful owner.
2) Where the title of the plaintiff is not disputed, but he
is not in possession, his remedy is to file a suit for possession
and seek in addition if necessary an injunction. A person out
of possession, cannot seek the relief of injunction simplicitor,
without claiming the relief of possession.
12/29
3) Where the plaintiff is in possession, but his title to the
property is in dispute, or under a cloud, or where the
defendant asserts title thereto and there is also a threat of
dispossession from defendant, the plaintiff will have to sue for
declaration of title and the consequential relief of injunction or
not able to establish possession, necessarily the plaintiff will
have to file a suit for declaration, possession and injunction.
30] In an action for recovery of possession of
immovable property, or for protecting possession thereof,
upon the legal title to the property being established, the
possession or occupation of the property by a person other
than the holder of the legal title will be presumed to have
been under and in subordination to the legal title, and it will
be for the person resisting a claim for recovery of
possession or claiming a right to continue in possession, to
establish that he has such a right. To put it differently,
wherever pleadings, and documents established title to a
particular property and possession is in question, it will be
for the person in possession to give sufficiently detailed
pleading, particulars and documents to support his claim in
order to continue in possession.
31] In Maria Margarida Sequeria
Fernandes and oth. V/s Erasmo Jack de Sequeria
(Dead) through Lrs AIR 2012 Supreme Court 1727 the
31
Hon'ble Apex Court has discussed that it would be

imperative that one who claims possession must give the
following below :-
a) Who is or are the owner or owners of the
property ;
b) Title of the property ;
c) Who is in possession of the title documents ;
13/29
d) Identity of the claimant or claimants to
possession ;
e) The date of entry into possession ;
f) How he came into possession whether he
purchased the property orinherited or got the same in gift or
by any other method ;
g) In case he purchased the property, what is the
consideration;if he has taken it on rent, how much is the
rent, license fee or lease amount ;
h) If taken on rent, license fee or lease then insist
on rent deed, license deed or lease deed ;
I) Who are the persons in possession / occupation
or otherwise living with him, in what capacity as family
members, friends or servants etc.;
j) Subsequent conduct i.e. any event which might
have extinguished his entitlement to possession or caused
shift therein and
k) Basis of his claim not to deliver possession but
continue in possession.
Settled possession
32] It is settled possession or effective possession of a
person without title which would entitle him to protect his
possession even as against the true owner. As held in case
between Puran singh v/s state of Punjab reported in 1975
(4) SCC 518 , “settled possession” must be ( a) effective, (b)
undisturbed and (c) to the knowledge of the owner or without
any attempt and concealment by the trespasser.
33] In Rame Gowda V/s Varadappa Naidu, 2004(1)
SCC 769, the Hon'ble Apex court has laid down following test
14/29
which may be adopted for determining the attributes of settled
possession as under :-
a) that the trespasser must be in actual physical
possession of the property over a sufficiently long period;
b) that the period must be to the knowledge (either
express or implied ) of the owner or without any attempt at
concealment by the trespasser and which contains an
element of animus possidendi. The nature of possession of
the trespasser would however, be a matter to be decided on
the facts and circumstances of each case;
c) the process of dispossession of the true owner by the
trespasser must be complete and final and must be
32
acquiesced to by the true owner and ;

d) That one of the usual tests to determine the quality of
settled possession, in the case of culturable land, would be
whether or not the trespasser, after having taken
possession, had grown any crop. If the crop had been grown
by the trespasser, then even the true owner has no right to
destroy the crop grown by the trespasser and take forcible
possession.
Nuisance
34] As nuisance ‘per se’ can be defined as any act or
omission or use of property or thing which is of itself hurtful to
the health, tranquility or morals or out rages the decency of the
public and which is not excusable under the circumstances. An
injunction will not be granted in every instance of alleged
nuisance. The present or threatened injury must be real, not
trifling, transient or temporary it must be one fro which either on
account of it’s essentially irreparable nature or its repetition or
continuance, the legal remedy of damages is inadequate. In
restraining a private nuisance by injunction a court of Equity
15/29
may act from one or more of these motives, the restraint of
irreparable mischief, the suppression of oppressive and
interminable litigation or preventing a multiplicity of suits. One
or more of these evils must be present or imminent to warrant a
court of Equity in granting the relief for it is not every case
which furnishes a right of action against a party which will
warrant a court of Equity in assuming jurisdiction to redress the
injury or to remove the annoyance.
Injunction in case of Bank Guarantee
35] There can not an injunction against the bank from
paying the amounts covered by bank guarantee furnished
unconditionally in the absence of fraud. Only on the ground of
fraud and in case of irreversible injury the bank guarantee can
be stayed.(U.P. Cooperative Federation Ltd. -Vs- Sing
Consultants and Engineers (P. Ltd.) [1988(1) S.C.C. 174)
Plaintiff should have personal interest in the matter
36] Under section 41 (j) of the Specific Relief Act,
an injunction cannot be granted where the applicant has no
personal interest in the matter. In the case of public funds, for
instance, a person interested in the smallest degree may sue if
there is malversation, and pray for an injunction. (Premji Vs
Union of India 1995(2) Bom.C.R.374 )
Anti-suit Injunctions
37] As per section 41 (a) an injunction cannot be granted
to restrain any person from prosecuting a judicial proceeding
pending at the institution of suit in which the injunction is
sought unless such restrain is necessary to prevent a
16/29
multiplicity of proceedings. The object is to avoid conflict of
judgments and orders. As per section 41 (b) an injunction
33
cannot be granted to restrain any person from instituting or

prosecuting any proceedings in a Court not subordinate to that
from which injunction is sought.
38] In Cotton Corporation of India Limited v.
United Industrial Bank Limited and Ors. (1983) 4 SCC 625,
it was held that the Court was precluded by its injunction to
grant stay of proceeding in a Court not subordinate to that from
which the injunction was sought. Dealing with the ambit and
scope of an anti suit injunctions, the Hon'ble Apex Court in Modi
Entertainment Network v. WSG Cricket Pte. Ltd.,AIR 2003
SC 1177] has laid down various guide-lines for anti-suit
injunctions.
Acquiescence or equitable estoppe l
39] Equitable estoppel is the effect of the valuntary
conduct of a party whereby he is absolutely precluded both at
law and equity, from asserting his rights which might perhaps
have otherwise existed, either of property. Of contract, or of
remedy, as against another person, who has in good faith relied
upon such conduct, and has been led thereby to change his
position for the worse ( Rekha Vs Rambhau AIR 2007
Bombay 135)
Section 151 C.P.C-
40] Civil Court has a power to grant interim injunction in
exercise of its inherent jurisdiction even if the case does not fall
within the ambit of provisions of Order 39 Code of Civil
Procedure. Manohar Lal Chopra Vs. Rai Bahadur Rao Raja
Seth Hira Lal, AIR 1962 SC 527.
17/29
41] Order 39 Rule 1 is not the sole repository of the power of
court to grant injunction but sec 151 confers power upon in court
to grant injunction if the matter is not covered by Rule 182. But
the court shall exercise inherent jurisdiction only when they
considered it absolutely necessary for the ends of justice and
exercise said discretion with exterme caution and only in very
rare cases(Tanushree Basu Vs. Ishanya Bagal, 2008 All S C
R. 1186 )
Caveat:-
42] Para 27 of Chapter II of Civil Manual, the Court,for the
special reasons to be recorded in writing can grant interim relief
without serving the caveator, if, in the opinion of the Court, the
object of granting interim relief on the application would be
defeated by delay.
Injunction against local/statutory bodies or government
43] Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure deals with
two classes of cases. Suits against Government and suits against
public officer. In the First Class notice under section 80 must be
given in all cases, whereas in the second class notice under
section 80 is necessary only where suit is in respect of any act
for purportedly to be done by such public officer in his official
capacity. The section is mandatory and it's terms are imperative
34
and admits of no exceptions. However, sub section (2) of

Section 80 provides for waiver of the notice in case urgent or
immediate relief need be granted in the suit. At any rate, no
relief by interim order or otherwise can be granted in such suits
without service of notice to the state or a public officer
concerned.
44] In case of Noor Mohammad Shameer
Shaikh..Vrs... Maharashtra Housing and Development
18/29
Board and Others, 2014 (1) Mh.L.J.92 wherein it is held that
“when the pre-suit statutory notices, as required under section
527 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act and also under
section 164 of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, are
mandatory legal provisions. Similar is the case of Harikishanlal
..Vrs.. State of Jammu & Kashimir (1994) 4 S.C.C 422.
45] In cases relating to orders for demolition of buildings,
irreparable loss may occur if the structure is demolished even
before trial, and an opportunity to establish by evidence that the
structure was authorized and not illegal. In such cases, where
prima facie case is made out, the balance of convenience
automatically tilts in favour of the plaintiff and a temporary
injunction will be issued to preserve status quo.(Seema Arshad
Zaheer and others Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater
Mumbai and others, (2006) 5 SCC 282)
46] In case of Abdul Hasan Shaikh Mansuri Vs Municipal
Corporation of Mumbai & Ors, 2007 (4) ALL MR 97 our Hon'ble
High Court directed all the Municipal Authority to consider
issuance of appropriate directions to all its officers concerned
that in a suit of such kind a statement be made on the first date
of hearing of the suit before the court on behalf of the authority
that they will follow the due process of law on which basis the
suit can be disposed of . It is further observed that, such suit can
be disposed of by Court on the date of hearing on the statement
made on behalf of authority that due process will be followed.
The Hon'ble High Court had given a word of caution that courts
should restrict grant of ad-Interim orders only to a limited time
and in the mean time call upon the local authorities to file their
reply and then decide the said application by giving priority to
such matters. Further it would be desirable in such cases that at
the time of granting ad-interim reliefs the court should appoint a
19/29
commissioner to inspect the construction. This would help to
curb the practice of misusing the interim order passed by the
courts.
47] In case of Sopan Maroti Thopate..vs..Pune
Municipal Corpor 1996 (1) Mh.L.J 963, the guidelines are
laid down about procedure to be followed before taking action
under section 351 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act or
under section 260 of Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation
Act.
35
48] Mere issuance of notice under the said section is not

sufficient to suggest that the due process of law has been
followed, in as much as after issuance of notice, the concerned
person would file response and which response has to be
considered by appropriate officer designated for that purpose
and that officer is obliged to pass decision, one way or the other.
Moreover, such a decision has to be communicated to the
affected person giving reasonable opportunity in that person to
challenge that decision as permissible by law. Unless such a
course was followed, it is not possible to conclude that due
process of law has been complied with. This has been held in
case of Mangesh Ghorpade ..Vrs.. Kalyan Dombivli
Municipal Corporation, 2005(3) Bombay CR 483.
49] Any person aggrieved by action of Panchayatunder
Sub Section (2) of Section 53 of Bombay Village Panchayat Act
can file appeals before Commissioner within thirty days from the
date of exercise of such power. The notices which are
challenged in such suit clearly in the exercise of the powers
vested with Gram Panchayat u/s 53(2) of Gram panchayat Act
and, therefore, as the action taken u/s 53(2) for which the
specific remedy is provided under Sub-Sec.3(A) of Sec. 53 of the
Act, prima facie the jurisdiction of civil court stands excluded. In
20/29
this respect reference can be made to a case of Village
Panchayat Anotore..Vrs..Wasudeo Mohod,2014(5)
Mah.L.J.189.
Negative covenant:
50] Negative covenant is a covenant which calls for
refraining from certain acts, or certain uses of property. Sec. 42
of Act 1963 provides that, a court may grant an injunction to
perform a negative covenant even where specific performance of
the affirmative covenant may not be enforced. The enforcement
of negative covenant of contract of personal service is based
squarely upon the theory that the defendants' services are
unique and extraordinary and therefore cannot be compensated
for monetary damages.
51] In the case of Percept D'mark (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Vs. Zahirkhan AIR 2006 SC 3426 Hon'ble Apex Court held it
is not permissible to grant an negative injunction if any of the
following contingency comes in the way-
A] Firstly, grant of this injunction resulted in compelling
performance of a contract of a personal, confidential and
fiduciary service, which is barred by Clause (b) and (d) of
Section 14(1) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.
B] Secondly, it is not only barred by Clause (a) of Sec.14(1) of
the Specific Relief Act, 1963, but this court has consistently held
that, there shall be no specific performance of contract for
personal services.
C] Thirdly, this amounted to granting the whole, or entire
relief which may be claimed at the conclusion of trial, which is
36
impermissible (Bank of Maharashtra Vs. Race Shipping AIR 1995

SC 1368).
21/29
D] Fourthly, if the plaintiff can be fully compensated in terms of
money,
E] Fifthly, the principle which governs injunction relief in such
cases of contract of a personal, or fiduciary nature, such as
management and agency contracts for sportsmen or performing
artistes
52] In the case of Suresh Dhaluka Vs. Sunita
Mahapatra AIR 2012 SC 892, Hon'ble Apex Court held that, ,
the injunction sought for by the appellant was not to restrain the
respondent from carrying on trade or business, but from using
the trademark, which was the subject matter of the suit,
accordingly the provisions of Sec. 27 of the Indian Contract Act,
1872 would not be attracted to the fact in this case.
Mandatory injunction
53] Section 39 of Specific Relief Act defines
mandatory injunction as “ is an order compelling to defendant to
restore things to the condition in which they were when the
plaintiff's complaint was made” Sub Rule (1) & (2) of Order
XXXIX of the Code of Civil Procedure deals with the provisions of
grant of Temporary Injunction. In Civil Procedure Code there is
no any specific provision for granting of mandatory temporary
injunction. However, applying the provisions of Sub-Rule (1) &
(2) of Order XXXIX the Civil Procedure Code temporary injunction
can be granted.
54] In case of Babab Narayan Landage..Vrs..
Mahadu Bhikaji Tonchar and others,1989 Mh.L.J.146 , it is
held that there are two essential per-requisite of exercising
jurisdiction by the Court. Firstly that, such power is not to be
exercise unless Court feels high degree of assurance that, at the
trial similar injunction would in all probabilities be granted and
22/29
secondly irreparable injury is caused if thing complained of is
allow to continue until final decision.
55] In case of Dorab Cawasji Warden.Vrs.
Coomi Sorab Warden, AIR 1990 S.C.867, the guidelines for
interim mandatory injunctions are laid down viz-
1. The plaintiff has a strong case for trial. That is, it shall
be of a higher standard than a prima facie case that is normally
required for a prohibitory injunction.
2. It is necessary to prevent irreparable or serious injury
which normally can not be compensated in terms of money.
3. The balance of convenience is in favour of the one
seeking such relief.
The above guidelines are neither exhaustive nor
complete or absolute rules. Grant of refusal of such injunction
raised in the sound judicial discretion of the court to be exercised
in the light of facts and circumstances of each case. While
37
seeking temporary mandatory injunction, the party should not

only make out prima facie case, balance of convenience and
irreparable loss, but also to prove that the case falls in
exceptional category where the court should intervene in
granting of relief which may in fact cover entire relief, that
should have been granted in the suit. Higher degree of
satisfaction of the Court is required, much higher than case
involving grant of prohibitory injunction. If the effect of
injunction is to alter status quo, then temporary mandatory
injunction cannot be granted. It is indeed a rare power. In
case of Mohd. Mehtabkhan..Vrs.. Khushnuma Ibrahim,
2014(2) Mh.L.J. 150 the guidelines laid down in case of Dorab
Warden are reiterated .
56] An interim mandatory injunction is not a remedy
that is easily granted. It is an order that is passed in
circumstances which are clear and prima facie materials justify
23/29
the finding that the status quo has been altered by one of the
parties to the litigation and interests of justice demanded that,
the status quo ante be restored by way of interim mandatory
injunction (Kishor Kumar Khaitan Vs Praveen Kumar Singh,
AIR 2006 SC 1474).
57] The Court shall very slow to grant ex-parte
mandatory order. However, in exceptional cases, only when
failure to do so will lead to an irreversible or irretrievable
situation. This has been laid down in case of State Bank of
Patiyala ..Vrs.. Vinishkumar Bhasain, 2010(3) ALL MR 981
(SC).
Injunction by defendant agaist plaintiff.
58] As per Order XXXIX Rule 1(a) of C.P.C . provides
that when any property in suit is in danger of being wasted,
damage or alienated by any party to the suit, other party can
claim injunction. Thus,Rule 1(b) & 1(c), shows injunctions by
plaintiff against defendant, whereas Rule 1(a) states about
parties to the suit, and therefore, defendant can seek temporary
injunction regarding subject matter of Rule 1(a) only.
Breach of Injunction and how to execute the order
59] In order to give power to the trial Court to
punish he erring defendant committing breach of an
interlocutory order Rule 2A was introduced in Order XXXIX of the
of the Civil Procedure Code. The purpose of Rule 2A of CPC is
not to punish a person who had disobeyed the injunction order
but to enforce it. Only willful disobedience invites the penal
action. Unless the knowledge of order of court is proved, the
beach thereof cannot be said to be willful. Rule 2A of Order 39
of the Civil Procedure Code does not apply to the final order
decree of permanent injunction passed by the Court at the
24/29
conclusion of the hearing of the suit. Rule 2A would apply for
breach of an undertaking given to the Court.
38
60] The application for breach of injunction should be

separately registered as Misc. Judicial case and should be tried
by framing appropriate points. The proceeding under Order 39,
Rule 2A of the Civil Procedure Code are absolutely independent
proceedings. ( Rampyaribai Sukhdeo Daga and ...Vrs..
Niladevi Naryandas, reported in 2007(4) Mh. L.J. 213)
61] In case of Food Corporation of India ..Vrs..
Sukhdeo Prasad AIR 2009 SC 2330 the Apex Court observed
that, “ order” in regard to which disobedience /breach was
alleged can not construed as creating obligation to do something
which is not mentioned in the “order” on surmises, suspicion and
inferences. Power under order 39 rule 2A should exercise with
great caution and responsibility in entertaining applications
under order 39 rule 2A from person who was not entitled to file
application and accepting interpretation of the said order which
does not flow from order and creating liability where non
existence.
62] The proceeding initiated on the ground of
disobedience or breach of injunction order is the nature of a
criminal proceeding. Here the principle of criminal law will apply
and the plaintiff will have to establish beyond any shadow of
doubt that the defendants had committed disobedience or
breach of the injunction order even though he had full knowledge
of the same.
63] If the undertaking have been breached
resulting in contempt of the order of the Court, which were in
form of consent terms of the parties, the direction to struck off of
25/29
defence is proper. (Sanjay Anagad Chaddha ..Vrs.Deepa
Sanjay Chaddha, 2011(7) All M.R.212)
64] The party committing disobedience and breach
of injunction, his property is liable to be attached and such
person may also be detained in the Civil prison for a term, not
exceeding three months. Attachment made under this Rule shall
not be remained in force more than a period of one year. In a
case of continuation of disobedience then attached property be
sold, and out of the sale proceeds, the Court may award such
compensation as it think fit to the injured party and balance, if
any, shall be returned to the owner. Rule 11 of Order 39 of the
Civil Procedure Code empowers the court to strike of defence of
defendant who commit breach of an order of the court. The
remedy for the enforcement/disobedience of either perpetual or
mandatory injunction is lying under Order 21 Rule 32 of C.P.C.
65] Even if the injunction order was subsequently set aside,
the disobedience does not get erased. It may be a different
matter that, the rigor of such disobedience may be toned down,
if the order is subsequently set aside. It is open to the court to
attach the property of the disobeying party and at the same time
the court can order to be detained in civil prison also, if the court
deems fit (Samee Khan Vs. Bindu Khan AIR 1998 SC
39
2765 ). Even where Court passed interim order, but without

jurisdiction, said order should be followed till set aside, failing
which, there will be breach of said interim order. (Tayyab
Ali..vs.. Hind Rubber Ind. Pvt. Ltd. AIR 1997 S.C. 1240. )
Damages :
66] Section 95 provides that, wherein any suit a
temporary injunction is granted and it appears to the Court that,
there was no sufficient grounds or the suit of plaintiffs fails and it
26/29
appears to court that, there was no reasonable or probable
ground for instituting the same, the Court may on application of
the defendant award reasonable compensation which may be to
the extent of pecuniary jurisdiction of the Court trying the suit.
Before an individual can recover damages, the injury suffered
must be one recognized by law as warranting redress and must
have actually been sustained by the individual. In relation to a
temporary injunction, the court may award damages as a
consequences, if the disobedience or breach continues after laps
of one year from the date of attachment of properly for breach
of temporary injunction order. The provision finds place in Order
39 Rule 2-A(2) of the Code.
Miscellaneous provisions relating to injunction,
67] Follwing are the miscellneous provisions-
(1) Order 39 Rule 1 of the C.P.C. regarding the temporary
injunction,
(2) Order 39 Rule 2A of C.P.C. regarding consequence of
disobedience or breach of injunction,
(3) Order 39 Rule 4 of C.P.C. regarding vary or set aside the
injunction,
(4) Order 39 Rule 6 of C.P.C regarding power to order interim
sale
(5) Order 39 Rule 7 of C.P.C regarding detention, preservation,
inspection, or subject matter of suit
(6) Order 39 Rule 9 of C.P.C regarding put in immediate
possession of land the subject matter of the suit
(7) Order 39 Rule 10 of C.P.C regarding deposit of money in the
court
27/29
(8) Order 39 Rule 11 of C.P.C Bombay High Court Amendment
Procedure regarding parties defying order of Court and
committing breach of under taking to the court
(9) Section 151 of the C.P.C. are regarding the injunction &
Section 94 (c) & (e) regarding grant of temporary injunction and
other interlocutory orders
(10) Order 21 Rule 26 (1)(2) and (3) of C.P.C regarding impose
the conditions when court grant a stay to execution , Order 41
Rule 5 and 6 of C.P.C regarding impose condition when court
grant stay to decree are the preventive relief like a nature of
injunction.
Other leading cases-
40
68] Where an objection to jurisdiction of civil court to

entertain a suit and to passed interim orders therein is raised.
The court should decide the question of jurisdiction in the first
instance but that does not mean that pending the decision on
the question of jurisdiction the court has no right to pass interim
order as may be called for.(Tayyabhai Bagusarwala Vs. Hind
Rubber Industries, 1997 SC 1240).
69] Referring the issue of tenancy by Civil Court to the
Tenancy Court, does not bar the Civil Court to grant interim relief
of injunction. (Laxmi..vs.. Savanta Bapu 1985 Mah.L.J.
314 (Bombay)
70] On restoration of suit, injunction order would be
automatically revived unless it has been specifically mentioned
at the time of dismissal that, it would not be revived. (Vareed
Jacob..vs.. Sosamma Geevarghese AIR 2004 S.C. 3992).
71] Practice of calling witness to challenge the affidavit of
that witness for deciding application for temporary injunction
should be deprecated (1981 Mah. Law Reporter 280).
28/29
72] Where an objection to jurisdiction of civil court
to entertain a suit and to passed interim orders therein is raised.
The court should decide the question of jurisdiction in the first
instance but that does not mean that pending the decision on
the question of jurisdiction the court has no right to pass interim
order as may be called for (Tayyabhai Bagusarwala Vs. Hind
Ruber Industries, 1997 SC 1240).
Conclusion
73] In view of the aforesaid, it can be concluded that
grant of temporary injunction cannot be claimed by the party as
a matter of right nor can be denied by the Court arbitrarily.
However, the discretion to be exercised by the Court is guided by
the principles mentioned here in above and depends on the facts
and circumstances of each case. The party seeking relief not
only has to establish prima facie case but also the irreparable
loss that would be caused in case of denial to grant relief and
that the balance of convenience lies in his favour.
74] Thus rational behind the provision of Order 39 of the
Code of Civil Procedure, as laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of M. Gurudas and Ors. Vs. Rasaranjan and Ors.
– AIR 2006 SC 3275, can be summarized as "While considering
an application for injunction, the Court would pass an order
thereupon having regard to prima facie, balance of convenience
and irreparable injury".
** ** **
Paper prepared by-
1) S. S. Das, District Judge-2 & Addl. Sessions Judge, Amaravati,
2) S. M. Bhosle, District Judge-4 & Addl. Sessions Judge, Amravati,
3) S.R. Bhajipale, 4th Jt. C.J.S.D. & Addl. C.J.M, Amaravati,
4) C..R. Balwani, 2nd Jt. C.J.S.D. & J. M. F. C, Amaravati,
5) Y.D. Koinkar, 8th Jt. C.J.S.D. & J. M. F. C, Amaravati.
** ** **
41
29/29
WITNESSES:
1 Sd/- A.B.
2 Sd/- C.D.
3 Sd/- E.F.
42
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS:
BAREACTS:
1. Transfer of property Act,1882
2. Indian Partnership Act, 1932
3. Income Tax Act,1961
4. Power of Attorney Act,1882
WEBSITES:
1. https://www.indiafilings.com/learn/section-189-dissolution-of-partnership-firm/
2. http://dailyojo.com/articles/what-is-partnership-deed.html
3. https://www.scribd.com/document/380362705/Drafting-of-Pleading-Conveyance-
eBook-Lecture-Notes-PDF-Download-Studynama-com-India-s-Biggest-Website-for-
Law-Study-Material-Downloads
4. https://www.virtualunderwriter.com/en/underwriting-manuals/2005-
8/UM00000052.html
5. https://www.scribd.com/document/380362705/Drafting-of-Pleading-Conveyance-
eBook-Lecture-Notes-PDF-Download-Studynama-com-India-s-Biggest-Website-for-
Law-Study-Material-Downloads
6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deed

Rayat College of Law Affidavit

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Rayat College of Law Affidavit

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

1

Rayat College of Law

Affidavit & appliati0 n

TOPIC: What are affidavit and applicati0n under civil law

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

Mr. AJITABH MISHRA VARUN CHHABRA

(Asst. prof.) BALLB (HONS.)

8TH SEM 13690

1 ELROY Affidavit 5, line 6

the youth asked for four things to change:

Affidavits most commonly used:

2. Regional Transport Authority for Issuance of Duplicate

Before the Regional Transport Officer, ___________________, New Delhi.

3. Affidavit to be Furnished by The Shareholder to the

The Board of Directors,

_____________Limited/ Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as "the

------ ---- -------

4. Affidavit for Condonation of Delay in Filing Appeal

Before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal at _______________

Managing Director of the Company on_______________ by taxi bearing no.

5. Affidavit to be Furnished to The Income Tax Authorities

Affidavit of Mr/Ms._______ S/o,/D/o Mr._____ aged___ years, resident of

Signed at _____________ this ___day of ____,

6. Affidavit to be Furnished to The Registrar of Marriages

Affidavit of Mr ________ S/o, Mr._______ aged___ years, resident of ____________.

7. Affidavit to be Submitted with a Writ Petition

Before the Hon'ble High Court of Juridicture at _______________

8. Affidavit with the Application for Amending The Wealth

status-quo. Therefore, status-quo should not be granted

party, 5) When any property in dispute is wrongfully sold in

prevent the disposal of assets before the judgment is enforced).

&Hardevsingh.VS. Gurmalsingh 2007[2] SCC444.

Injunction to protect Grazing rights :-

Hon'ble Apex Court has discussed that it would be

acquiesced to by the true owner and ;

cannot be granted to restrain any person from instituting or

and admits of no exceptions. However, sub section (2) of

48] Mere issuance of notice under the said section is not

impermissible (Bank of Maharashtra Vs. Race Shipping AIR 1995

seeking temporary mandatory injunction, the party should not

60] The application for breach of injunction should be

2765 ). Even where Court passed interim order, but without

68] Where an objection to jurisdiction of civil court to

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen

Affidavit of Mr/Ms._____ S/o,/D/o Mr._ aged_ years, resident of

Signed at ___________ this _day of ____,

Affidavit of Mr ____ S/o, Mr._ aged_ years, resident of ____________.