The Weekly Obiter

INJUNCTION CANNOT BE GRANTED WHERE REMEDY OF DAMAGES LIES: DHC: MAY 31, 2017

June 27, 2017

The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the matter of “M/s Sai Associates Versus Delhi Wakf Board & Ors bearing W.P (C) No. 8501/2016”, has held that no injunction can be granted in a case where the remedy for wrongful termination would be by way of damages. The Hon’ble Court observed that in terms of Section 14 of the Specific Relief Act where compensation in terms of money is an adequate relief for non-performance of a contract, court would not direct specific performance of the contract. No injunction can be issued preventing a party from terminating a license. The Hon’ble Court placed reliance on the judgment of “Rajasthan Breweries Ltd. versus The Stroh Brewery Co. AIR 2000 DELHI 450” wherein it has been held that Specific Performance will not be ordered where damages are adequate remedy or where the party applying for relief is guilty of a breach of contract or is guilty of wrongful conduct or where the contract involves personal service or where the contract requires constant supervision or where the party against whom specific performance is sought is entitled to terminate the contract. If the party against whom specific performance is sought, is entitled to terminate the contract, the order will be refused as the defendant could render the direction to perform nugatory by exercising his powers to terminate. This principle has been held to be applicable whether the contract is terminable under its express terms or because of the conduct of the party seeking specific performance. The Hon’ble Court had further held that if it is found that a contract, which by its very nature is determinable, the same not only cannot be enforced but in respect of such a contract, no injunction could also be granted and this is mandate of law. 

Tags: