Injunction is a judicial remedy in the form of a court order that directs a party either to refrain from doing a specific act (prohibitory injunction) or to perform a specific act (mandatory injunction). Under Indian law, injunctions are governed by Sections 36-42 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 for permanent injunctions and Order 39 Rules 1-2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for temporary injunctions.
Legal definition
The Specific Relief Act, 1963 provides the statutory framework for injunctions:
Section 36 — Preventive relief how granted: "Preventive relief is granted at the discretion of the court by injunction, temporary or perpetual."
Section 37 — Temporary and perpetual injunctions: "(1) Temporary injunctions 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, and are regulated by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. (2) A perpetual injunction can only be granted by the decree made at the hearing and upon the merits of the suit; the defendant is thereby perpetually enjoined from the assertion of a right, or from the commission of an act, which would be contrary to the rights of the plaintiff."
Section 38 — Perpetual injunction when granted: "The plaintiff may, in addition to, or in substitution for, any other remedy, claim a perpetual injunction in respect of a right in his favour — (a) when the defendant invades or threatens to invade the plaintiff's right to, or enjoyment of, property; or (b) when the defendant threatens the plaintiff with breach of an obligation existing in the plaintiff's favour..."
The Act also specifies when injunctions cannot be granted. Section 41 lists specific circumstances where an injunction shall be refused, including to restrain a judicial proceeding, to restrain a person from applying to a legislative body, or where the plaintiff has no personal interest.
How courts have interpreted this term
Dalpat Kumar v. Prahlad Singh [(1992) 1 SCC 719]
The Supreme Court laid down the definitive three-part test for granting a temporary injunction: (1) whether the plaintiff has established a prima facie case; (2) whether the balance of convenience is in favour of the plaintiff; and (3) whether the plaintiff would suffer irreparable injury if the injunction is refused. The Court held that all three elements must be satisfied, and that the court must weigh these factors in their totality rather than deciding on any single factor in isolation.
Gujarat Bottling Co. Ltd. v. Coca Cola Co. [(1995) 5 SCC 545]
The Supreme Court clarified that the grant of an injunction is an equitable remedy and the court must exercise its discretion judicially. The Court held that the three conditions — prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury — are not watertight compartments but are interrelated considerations. Where the prima facie case is very strong, the court may grant an injunction even if the balance of convenience is evenly poised.
Seema Arshad Zaheer v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai [(2006) 5 SCC 282]
The Supreme Court held that a mandatory injunction — one requiring a party to perform a positive act — is granted only in exceptional circumstances. The Court observed that courts are generally reluctant to grant mandatory injunctions at the interim stage because such orders effectively amount to granting the final relief before trial. A mandatory injunction requires a higher threshold: the plaintiff must demonstrate a strong prima facie case approaching certainty, not merely an arguable case.
Types of injunction
Indian law recognises several categories of injunctions:
- Prohibitory injunction: An order restraining the defendant from doing a specific act — the most common form. Example: restraining the defendant from constructing on disputed land or from infringing a trademark.
- Mandatory injunction: An order directing the defendant to perform a positive act — such as demolishing an unauthorised structure or restoring possession. Governed by Section 39 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.
- Temporary injunction: An interim order granted during the pendency of a suit under Order 39 CPC, designed to preserve the status quo until the suit is decided.
- Permanent injunction: A final order granted by decree at the conclusion of trial under Sections 38-42 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.
- Ex parte injunction: A temporary injunction granted without hearing the other party, where delay would defeat the purpose of the order. Must be confirmed or vacated after hearing the opponent.
Why this matters
The injunction is one of the most powerful and frequently sought remedies in Indian civil litigation. It is a preventive remedy — designed to prevent harm before it occurs or to arrest ongoing harm — and its availability can determine the practical outcome of a dispute regardless of the final decree.
For litigants, understanding the distinction between temporary and permanent injunctions is essential. A temporary injunction under Order 39 CPC is an interim measure that preserves the status quo during litigation. It does not determine the merits of the dispute and can be modified or vacated at any stage. A permanent injunction under Sections 38-42 of the Specific Relief Act is a final remedy granted by decree after full trial.
For practitioners, the tactical significance of injunction applications cannot be overstated. In property disputes, commercial competition cases, and intellectual property matters, obtaining a temporary injunction at the early stages of litigation often provides decisive practical advantage. Conversely, the failure to obtain an injunction — particularly in cases involving ongoing construction, business operations, or intellectual property infringement — can render the eventual decree meaningless because the harm would already be done.
A critical area of evolving jurisprudence is the grant of injunctions against government and public authorities. Courts have held that injunctions should not ordinarily be granted to restrain the government from enforcing statutory obligations, but exceptions exist where the government action is ex facie illegal or violates fundamental rights.
Related terms
Specific types:
Related remedies:
Broader concepts:
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between a temporary injunction and a permanent injunction?
A temporary injunction is an interim order under Order 39 CPC granted during the pendency of a suit to preserve the status quo. It can be modified, vacated, or extended at any stage. A permanent injunction is a final remedy granted by decree under Sections 38-42 of the Specific Relief Act after full trial on merits. A temporary injunction does not determine the final rights of the parties.
Can an injunction be granted against the government?
Generally, courts are reluctant to grant injunctions against the government when it acts within its statutory powers. Section 41(b) of the Specific Relief Act bars injunctions to restrain persons from applying to legislative bodies. However, if government action is patently illegal, without jurisdiction, or violates fundamental rights, courts may grant injunctions — particularly under Article 226 of the Constitution.
What is an ex parte injunction?
An ex parte injunction is a temporary injunction granted without hearing the opposing party, where the court is satisfied that the delay caused by notice would defeat the purpose of granting the injunction. Under Order 39 Rule 3 CPC, if an ex parte injunction is granted, the court must record reasons, and the matter must be listed for hearing within 30 days for the opponent to be heard.
Can an injunction be granted in an appeal?
Yes. Under Order XLI Rule 5 CPC, the appellate court may grant a stay of execution of the decree appealed against, which operates as an injunction. Additionally, under Section 151 CPC (inherent powers), appellate courts may grant temporary injunctions to preserve the subject matter of the appeal pending its disposal.
This entry is part of the Veritect Indian Legal Glossary, a comprehensive reference of Indian legal terminology grounded in statutory text and judicial interpretation.
Last updated: 2026-03-27. Veritect provides this content for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice.