Case Name : Tek Singh vs Shashi Verma & Anr Case Reference: (2019) 16 SCC 678 Case Number: Civil Appeal No 1416/2019 Court: Supreme Court Bench: 02 Coram: RF Nariman (Author), Vineet Saran Date: 04.02.2019
Revisional jurisdiction is to correct only jurisdictional errors. When mandatory injunction is granted at the interim stage, much more than a prima facie case has to be made out.
Refer also: DLF Housing & Construction Co. (P) Ltd vs Sarup Singh, (1969) 3 SCC 807 While exercising jurisdiction under CPC - Section 115, the revisional court is not competent to correct errors of fact however gross; it is also not competent to correct errors of law – unless the said errors have relation to the lower court’s jurisdiction to try the dispute itself The words “illegally” and “with material irregularity” do not cover errors of fact of fact or law. They do not refer to the decision arrived at but merely the manner in which it is reached. The errors contemplated relate either to breach of some provision of law or material defects of procedure affecting the ultimate decision. Dorab Cawasji Warden vs Coomi Sorab Warden, (1990) 2 SCC 117 The guidelines for granting interlocutory mandatory injunctions are 1. The plaintiff must have a strong case for trial; which is a higher standard than prima facie case that is normally required for prohibitory injunction. 2. It is necessary to prevent irreparable or serious injury which normally cannot be compensated in terms of money. 3. The balance of convenience is in favour of the one seeking such relief.
See also: CPC - Order XLIII rule 1 CPC - Order XXXIX rule 1 CPC - Order XXXIX rule 2 SRA, Section 6 SRA - Section 41