DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN DECLARATORY RELIEF AND INJUNCTION

Admin

3 months ago

Spread the love

This article is written by Anshika Verma of 3^rd Semester of Rabindranath Tagore University, Bhopal, an intern under Legal Vidhiya

ABSTRACT

The legal concepts of declaratory relief and injunctions are examined in this article, with an emphasis on their differences and functions within the legal system. Declaratory relief is a legal remedy in which a court establishes the party’s rights, responsibilities, or duties without imposing any kind of enforcement or coercion. By attempting to resolve legal ambiguities, it frequently stops conflicts from getting worse. Likewise, an injunction is a court order that requires a party to carrying out or abstain from doing a particular act. Coercive in nature, injunction are used to stop harm, guarantee compliance, or maintain the status quo in controversial circumstances. Injunctions and declaratory relief are two separate legal remedies with different functions in dispute resolution, both of which are essential to legal system. The main difference between the two is their function and goal, an injunction imposes duties or limitations to accomplish a particular goal, whereas declaratory relief provides a declaration of legal rights. Moreover, injunction are remedial and frequently enforced through fines for noncompliance, whereas declaratory relief is preventive and non-coercive. In order to highlight each remedy’s significance in the legal system and their complementary functions in settling conflicts and defending legal rights, the article concludes by providing examples of each remedies, examining judicial interpretations and practical implication.

KEYWORDS

Injunction, Declaratory relief, judicial decisions, difference, resolution, provisions, remedies, purpose

INTRODUCTION

Declaratory relief and injunctions are two different but equally important legal remedies for resolving conflicts and upholding the rule of law. In situations where monetary compensation is insufficient, both are equitable remedies intended to address particular needs. Legal professionals and academics must comprehend these distinctions because they demonstrate the complex ways in which courts strike a balance between duties, rights, and fair results. When irreparable harm is imminent and no other legal remedies are available, injunctive relief stops or forces certain actions and monetary damages are insufficient to correct a legal wrong or stop future harm, injunctive relief is entitled to seek. There are two main types of injunctions: temporary injunctions and permanent injunctions. The ruling that establishes the plaintiff’s rights is known as a declaratory relief. It is a legally binding declaration in which the court affirms certain rights that are already in place for the plaintiff. A declaratory decree only occurs when the plaintiff is denied a right to which they are entitled. Subsequently, the plaintiff obtains specific relief from the defendant who denied him his rights.

The purpose, legal ramifications, and procedural requirements of these two remedies set them apart from one another. Injunctions entail the active enforcement of a court’s order, whereas declaratory relief concentrates on establishing legal relationships. Furthermore, while declaratory relief focuses more on elucidating rights to prevent future disputes, injunctions frequently require the petitioner to show urgency, irreparable harm, and the insufficiency of other remedies. Declaratory relief aims to address uncertainties before they become disputes by taking a preventive approach. Conversely, injunctions are corrective measures intended to rectify or stop harm.

The laws governing the injunctions are covered under three main acts Specific Relief Act, 1963, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Whereas the declaratory relief is covered under Specific Relief Act, 1963.

DEFINITIONS

Declaratory Relief: Declaratory relief, also commonly known as declaratory judgement or declaration, is a form of discretionary remedy which parties may seek from the court. A declaration is essentially a statement made by the court at the request of a party.^[1] Declaratory relief refers to a court’s declaratory judgement stating the rights of parties without ordering any specific action or listing awards for damages. It allows a party who is not certain of his rights to prevent the accrual of avoidable damages and to obtain an adjudication before the parties bring a coercive lawsuit.²

Coercive relief, in which the court requires a party to pay monetary damages or to take specific action injunctive relief, can be compared to declaratory relief. When one party asks for a declaratory judgment, they are trying to ask for an official statement about the current state of the dispute. Furthermore, the goal is to resolve the stated rights of all parties in order to hopefully stop the conflict from getting worse or even form going to court. For Example, In a case involving contracts would be a party seeking an interpretation of the contract to determination of their rights and surrounding circumstances regarding insurance coverage under a specific policy.^[2]

Injunction: An injunction is a civil court order that orders one or more parties to carry out or refrain from doing a specific act or multiple acts. It is a protective measure to preserve or prevent the loss of an asset, protect someone against personal harm, prevent loss or damage to reputation and safeguard business or personal interest.^[3] An effective legal tool that functions as a court order compelling a party to act or stop performing particular acts is an injunction. It is essential in many court cases, either as a remedy to enforce rights or as a preventative measure to stop legal wrongs. An injunction is a legal process in which someone who has infringed or threatened to infringe on another’s rights is barred from continuing or initiating the wrongful act.[4] For example, A court stops a business from operating in a residential area due to excessive noise or harmful emissions causing distress to the community.

Types of injunctions

Temporary injunctions: Temporary injunctions are granted until a final decision can be made, to prevent the status quo. These can continue for length of legal proceedings and are typically granted at the beginning of a case.
Permanent Injunctions: Following the court’s final decision in the case, permanent injunction are issued. They forbid the defendant from carrying on with a specific behaviour or action.
Mandatory Injunctions: These orders compel the defendant to perform a specific action. They are frequently awarded in situations involving contract violations, where the plaintiff demands that the defendant carry out their end of the bargain.
Prohibitory Injunctions: These orders forbid the defendant from engaging in specific behaviour or action. They are frequently given out in situations involving defamation or intellectual property violations.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DECLARATORY RELIEF AND INJUNCTION

Elements	Declaratory Relief	Injunction
Nature	The rights, responsibilities, or duties of the parties to a legal dispute are decided by the court. It clarifies the parties legal status or position without requiring them to take any action or remain silent.	A court order known as a mandatory injunction or prohibitory injunction requires a party to either do something or refrain from doing something. It forces or limits a party’s behaviour.
Purpose	Resolving doubt or ambiguity about legal rights or obligations is the main goal. By determining the parties legal standing, it offers clarity and can avoid further disputes.	The goal is to stop damage or injury that could happen if one party starts or continues to do certain things. Maintaining the status quo or preventing rights violations are common goals.
Outcome	The court’s declaration defining the parties rights or responsibilities is the result. There is no enforcement or coercive action as a result.	An injunction is a court order that requires adherence. Contempt of court proceedings and other sanctions may result from breaking an injunction.
Procedural Aspect	The procedure usually entails submitting a petition or complaint outlining the facts and legal foundation for the declaration request. It might not call for urgency or quick action.	The procedural frequency includes filing a application for a temporary or permanent injunction, which particularly in the instance of a preliminary injunction, may necessitate a hearing to prove the need for prompt relief.
Example	To ascertain if a given contract is legitimate or whether a particular law applies to their circumstances, a party may get a declaratory decision.	A party may request an injunction to stop a business from using a trademark that violates their rights or to stop a neighbour from erecting a fence that encroaches on their land.

RELATED PROVISIONS

Section 34^[5]: It states that “Any person entitled to any legal character, or to any right as to any property, may institute a suit against any person denying, or interested to deny, his title to such character or right, and the court may in its discretion make therein a declaration that he is so entitled, and the plaintiff need not in such suit ask for further relief”:

Provided that no court shall make any such declaration where the plaintiff, being able to seek further relief than a mere declaration of title, omits to do so.

It provides for “a suit against any person denying or interested to deny the plaintiffs’ title to the legal character or right to any property”. So it is clear that the plaintiff’s task is not over once he proves that he is entitled to the legal character or right to property, it is for him to convince the court that the defendant has denied or interested to deny that legal character or right of the plaintiff. Then only he can succeed in obtaining the declaration sought.^[6]

Section 35^[7]: It says that “A declaration made under this chapter is binding only on the parties to the suit, persons claiming through them respectively, and where any of the parties are trustees, on the persons for whom, if in existence at the date of the declaration, such parties would be trustees”

The present provision lays down that the declaration made under Section 34 is binding on: The parties to the suit, Persons claiming through them, Trustees, where any of the parties are trustees, on the person for whom, if in existence at the date of the declaration, such parties would be trustees.^[8]

The provisions related to injunction are covered under Specific Relief Act, 1963, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Section 91^[9]: According to this section of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the advocate-general or two or more people may, with the consent of the court, institute a suit for a declaration and injunction in cases of public nuisance or other wrongdoing that affects or may affect the public.

Section 94^[10]: This section gives wide discretion to guarantee that justice is done. Includes the authority to temporary injunctions to stop damage or preserve the status quo, to prevent injustice, provide additional suitable remedies and hold, protect, or examine the disputed property.

Section 95^[11]: It says about compensation for wrongfully obtained injunction, the defendant may seek damages if a plaintiff secures a temporary injunction on fake or inadequate grounds. The purpose is to deter baseless or malicious requests for injunctions.

Additionally, the enforcement of a decree for an injunction or particular performance is covered in Rule 32 of Order XXI. Order XXXIX addresses interlocutory orders and temporary injunctions in particular.¹²

Section 152^[12]: Under this section of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, as it mandates particular activities to eliminate or prevent a nuisance, it is comparable to a mandatory injunction.

Section 161^[13]: This section requires particular acts to eliminate or prevent a nuisance, it is comparable to a mandatory injunction.

Section 163^[14]: This section related to a prohibitory injunction, it limits behaviour that could cause injury or disorder.

Section 36^[15]: Under this section of Specific Relief Act, 1963 states that injunctions can be used to impose preventive relief, which is given to stop an obligation from being damaged.

Section 37^[16]: This section says that, the CPC regulates temporary injunctions, which are issued while a case is pending and following a detailed hearing of the parties, the court issues a decree granting perpetual injunctions.

Section 38^[17]: Under this section, to stop an obligation from being destroyed in the applicant’s favour, a perpetual injunction is obtained.

Section 39^[18]: This section states that, in order to stop a violation or correct an incorrect circumstance, a mandatory injunction mandates the defendant to carry out a certain action.

Section 40^[19]: It says, in lieu of or in addition to an injunction, a party may seek damages. The plaint must include a particular claim for damages.

Section 41^[20]: This section outlines the circumstances under which an injunction cannot be granted.

Section 42^[21]: This section states that, a court may provide an injunction to enforce a contract that contains a negative covenant, which is a duty not to do anything.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

State of M.P. v. Khan Bahadur Bhiwandiwala and Co.^{^[22]} : The Court ruled that the appellant was not entitled to a declaratory remedy since government contracts cannot be enforced automatically unless it is established that there was no statutory breach and the contact was legally binding. The court further concluded that declaratory relief would not be provided in cases where a contract is not legally enforceable (for instance, if it is thought to be unlawful or void).
Hiralal v. Gulab^{^[23]}: The Court held that, a declaratory order can only be issued if the petitioner has a “legal character” or “right as to property” and no other relief is sought or possible, as stipulated by section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.The court decided that the complaint for mere declaratory relief could not be maintained because the plaintiff did not seek consequential relief, such as possession of the property.
Takar Chandra Das v. Anukul Chandra Mukherjee^{^[24]}: The Calcutta High Court held that, as long as the lawsuit is founded on a legitimate disagreement over property rights or title, declaratory relief may be awarded even in cases where no consequential relief is expressly requested. The court decided that in order to clear up a legal ambiguity, declaratory relief may be provided under section 42 of the Specific Relief Act where an individual requests a declaration of their legal right, such as property ownership.
Gujarat Bottling Co. Ltd v. Coca-cola Co.^{^[25]} : The Supreme Court issued an injunction to stop a party from breaking a negative covenant in a business deal and maintained the covenant’s legality. According to the court, if contractual duties are fair and legal, injunctions may be utilized to enforce them.
Cotton Corporation of India Ltd. v. United Industrial bank Ltd.^{^[26]}: The Court decided that unless there is distinctive proof of fraud or irretrievable harm, an injunction prohibiting a bank from upholding a guarantee should not be issued.
Krishna Ram Mahale v. Shobha Venkat Rao²⁸: The court held that, even in cases when a tenant’s lease has ended, they cannot be evicted from their property without completing the required legal procedures.

CONCLUSION

Injunctions and declaratory relief are essential legal instruments with different functions. While injunctions seek to stop harm or enforce duties, declaratory relief concentrates on defining rights and clearing up legal ambiguities. A decree that declares a right that is unclear or requires clarification is established as a declaratory relief, such a decree’s goal is to eliminate the sources of contention in order to stop further litigation. Injunctions are essential as they offer practical solutions to stop injustice and keep civil cases in order, it is crucial to comprehend the different kinds of injunction that are available as well as the provisions dealing with injunctions. In judicial decisions courts use their discretion in awarding these reliefs, taking into account the particular facts of each cases. While injunctions are granted to uphold rights and prevent injustice whereas, declaratory relief is frequently sought to resolve legal disputes and offer clarifications.

In conclusion, the primary manner that declaratory relief and injunction differ from one another is that they are used and applied within the legal system. Declaratory relief clarifies the parties rights, obligations, or legal standing without necessarily enforcing any restrictions or actions. It offers a court ruling that can direct behavior going forward and clear up ambiguities, averting future conflicts. An injunction, on the other hand, is a more preventative remedy that prevents a party from engaging in particular behaviors or forces them to take specific actions. During legal proceedings, it is frequently used to keep things as they are or to prevent harm. Parties seeking for suitable legal remedies in civil disputes must be aware of these distinctions.

REFERENCES

[1] LexisNexis, https://www.lexisnexis.co.uk/legal/guidance/declaratory-relief, ( last visited Jan. 23, 2025). ² Legal Information Institute, https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/declaratory_judgment, (last visited Jan. 23, 2025).

[2] Legal Information Institute, https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/declaratory_judgment, (last visited Jan. 23, 2025).

[3] Paul Britton, What is an injunction? Everything You Need to Know, BRITTON & TIME, (Oct. 15, 2024), https://brittontime.com/2021/04/26/what-is-an-injunction-everything-you-need-to-know/.

[4] Ruchitha Bafna, Injunctions And Their Kinds, LAWYERSCLUBINDIA, (Mar. 15, 2024), https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/articles/injunctions-and-their-kinds-14589.asp.

[5] Specific Relief Act, 1963, § 34, No. 47, Act of Parliament, 1963 (India).

[6] Alok Ram Tripathi, Mithilesh Pandey, Ravindra Dev Mishra, Declaratory Decree under Specific Relief Act, 1963, Ujala Book.2.2, https://ujala.uk.gov.in/files/7.pdf.

[7] Specific Relief Act, 1963, § 35, No. 47, Act of Parliament, 1963 (India).

[8] Drishti judiciary, https://www.drishtijudiciary.com/ttp –specific –relief –act/Declaratory%20Decrees , (last visited Jan. 24, 2025).

[9] Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, § 91, No. 05, Act of Parliament, 1908 (India).

[10] Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, § 94, No. 05, Act of Parliament, 1908 (India).

[11] Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, § 95, No. 05, Act of Parliament, 1908 (India).

¹² Sri G.Shiva Prasad Yadav, Declaration and Injunction Suits, (Jan 23, 2025, 1:26 PM), https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s3ec03333cb763facc6ce398ff83845f22/uploads/2024/03/2024031477.pdf.

[12] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, § 152, No. 46, Act of Parliament, 2023 (India).

[13] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, § 161, No. 46, Act of Parliament, 2023 (India).

[14] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, § 163, No. 46, Act of Parliament, 2023 (India).

[15] Specific Relief Act, 1963, § 36, No. 47, Act of Parliament, 1963 (India).

[16] Specific Relief Act, 1963, § 37, No. 47, Act of Parliament, 1963 (India).

[17] Specific Relief Act, 1963, § 38, No. 47, Act of Parliament, 1963 (India).

[18] Specific Relief Act, 1963, § 39, No. 47, Act of Parliament, 1963 (India).

[19] Specific Relief Act, 1963, § 40, No. 47, Act of Parliament, 1963 (India).

[20] Specific Relief Act, 1963, § 41, No. 47, Act of Parliament, 1963 (India).

[21] Specific Relief Act, 1963, § 42, No. 47, Act of Parliament, 1963 (India).

[22] State of M.P. v. Khan Bahadur Bhiwandiwala and co., AIR 1971 MP 65.

[23] Hiralal v. Gulab, 10 CPLR, 1

[24] Tarak Chandra Das v. Anukul Chandra Mukherjee, AIR 1946 Cal. 118.

[25] Gujarat Bottling Co. Ltd. V. Coca-Cola Co. AIR 1995 SC 2372.

[26] Cotton Corporation of India Ltd. V. United Industrial Bank Ltd., AIR 1983 SC 1272. ²⁸ Krishna Ram Mahale v. Shobha Venkat Rao, AIR 1989 SC 2097.

Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or the materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is personal.

Admin

PDF 📄