⚖️ SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT: Interlocutory Mandatory Injunctions

The relief of interlocutory mandatory injunction is granted generally to preserve or restore the status quo of the last non-contested status which preceded the pending controversy until the final hearing when full relief may be granted.

📌 Supreme Court in Dorab Cawasji Warden v. Coomi Sorab Warden [1990 SC]

Guidelines for grant of interlocutory mandatory injunctions:

• ✅ The plaintiff has a strong case for trial (higher than prima facie required for prohibitory injunction).
• ✅ It is necessary to prevent irreparable or serious injury not compensable in terms of money.
• ✅ The balance of convenience favors the party seeking relief.

Delhi Law Academy Jaipur presents below for aspirants of Rajasthan Judicial Service (RJS), DJS, PCS (J) and other Judicial Services throughout India a very important judgment of the Supreme Court of India in Dorab Cawasji Warden v. Coomi Sorab Warden [1990] laying down guidelines for grant of interlocutory mandatory injunctions.

📄 JUDGMENT

1. The courts can grant interlocutory mandatory injunction in certain special circumstances.
2. The relief is generally granted to preserve or restore the status quo of the last non-contested position preceding the pending controversy until final hearing. Granting or non-granting may cause irreparable harm, hence guidelines are evolved.
3. Guidelines summarized:
   • ✅ Plaintiff has a strong case for trial (higher standard than prima facie case for prohibitory injunction).
   • ✅ Necessary to prevent irreparable or serious injury not compensable in money.
   • ✅ Balance of convenience favors the one seeking relief.
4. Grant or refusal is an equitable relief resting in sound judicial discretion based on facts and circumstances.
5. Application to this case:
   • Subject matter under Section 44: dwelling house of an undivided family, transferred to a non-member.
   • Ratio under Partition Act section 4 applies; “undivided family” and “dwelling house” have same meaning.
   • Plaintiff-appellant shows prima facie case for dwelling house belonging to undivided family.
   • Clause 6 shows defendants acted secretly, attempting to forestall litigation and gain undue advantage.
   • Refusal to grant interim mandatory injunction would cause irreparable injury; balance of convenience favors appellant.

*************