Cases wherein claimants assert their right, title or interest over property, no injunction can be granted without giving them opportunity of being heard: SC

Read Judgment: Acqua Borewell Pvt. Ltd. vs. Swayam Prabha & Others

Pankaj Bajpai

New Delhi, November 18,2021: While quashing the order passed by the High Court granting injunction against alienation in the plaint schedule properties, the Supreme Court has said that no such injunction can be granted without allowing opportunity of hearing to the claimants of right, title or interest over such property.  

A Division Bench of Justice M.R. Shah and Justice B.V. Nagarathna therefore observed that injunction granted by High Court with respect to schedule properties without giving an opportunity of being heard to the appellants and without impleading them as party defendants in the suit, deserves to be set aside. 

The observation came pursuant to an appeal filed by third parties challenging the judgment passed by Karnataka High Court, whereby the interim injunction granted by the Additional City Civil Judge, Bengaluru, had been modified and restricted the injunction against alienation to the extent of 1/7th share in the total plaint schedule properties was restricted till the disposal of the case. 

The Appellants contended that some of the suit properties for which injunction was granted, the appellants have right, title or interest on the basis of the development agreement/s and/or otherwise and though they are directly affected by the interim injunction granted by the High Court, they are not made parties to the suit. 

The Appellants also contended that without disposing of the applications to implead the appellants as necessary and proper parties, the High Court ought not to have granted injunction with respect to properties in which the appellants claim right, title or interest. 

After considering the arguments, the Apex Court said that before granting any injunction with respect to the properties in which the appellants (proposed defendants) are claiming right, title or interest on the basis of the development agreements or otherwise, they ought to have been given an opportunity of being heard. 

No injunction could have been granted against them without impleading them as defendants and thereafter without giving them an opportunity of being heard, added the Court. 

“The trial Court dismissed the injunction application and refused injunction by observing that some of the properties are evidently owned by the firms/trusts/companies which have not been made parties to the suit”, observed the Top Court. 

The Top Court therefore directed the trial Court to first dispose of the applications filed by the plaintiffs to implead the appellants as party-defendants after giving them an opportunity of being heard, in accordance with law.