What is Interim Order?

The word “interim” according to the dictionary means “for the time
being”, “in the meantime”, “meanwhile”, “temporary”, “provisional’,
“not final”, “intervening”. When the word is used as an adjective, it
means “temporary” or “provisional” and when it is used as a noun it
means “intervening”.[C.K. THAKKER & M.C. THAKKER, CIVIL PROCEDURE
WITH LIMITATION ACT, 1963 554 (8ed. 2017]

Supplementarily, according to Section 2 (14) of the Civil Procedure

Code, 1908 the word “order” refers to the formal expression of any
decision (not a decree) of a civil court.

Collectively, the words “interim order” means temporary order passed

by the court to maintain the “status quo” during the pendency of the suit
and to ensure that, during the course of the proceedings, no harm should
be caused to the interest of the parties involved in the suit and, before
the final hearing, the subject matter of the suit shall not become abortive
or a fait accompli.

The legal maxim “Actus curiae neminem gravabit” best explains the
reason why the court passes such orders. The meaning of this maxim is
that “any act of the court should not be biased to anyone.”

Classification of Interim
Orders

An interim order may be classified into two categories depending upon

the nature of the direction issued by the court.

1. Directive Order– The courts issue a directive order to instruct

either party to act in a specific way until the trial ends or a
further order is issued. If not continuing the action would harm
 the other party then the courts can issue a directive interim
order.
2. Restraining Order– The courts issue a restraining order to
prevent any of the parties from acting in a specific way while the
civil lawsuit is pending. The courts issue these orders to prevent
any party from being harmed because the other party may have
continued acting upon the issue involved in the suit.

When an Interim Order can be

Passed?

The main motive of passing an interim order is to safeguard the plaintiff

from irrecoverable losses. If later, the uncertainty of the matter in the
suit is resolved in favour of the plaintiff then it should not happen that
the plaintiff will not get sufficient compensation in the lawsuit because
of that irreparable loss.

So, interim orders are passed by the court but these orders are passed
only on the basis of the primary findings if prima facie court feels that
an interim order should be passed then a court can pass it but one should
not forget that these orders are tentative.[ Anand Prasad Agarwalla vs.
Tarkeshwar Prasad & Ors. AIR 2001 SC 2367]

The granting of interim order depends on the scope and nature of the
facts and circumstances of each case because it is impossible to provide
a single formula for the calculation of the same.

In certain situations where the defendant can use the property involved
in the dispute in such a way that the situation becomes irreparable, these
temporary reliefs should be granted by the court.{M. Gurudas & Ors. Vs.
Rasaranjan & Ors. AIR 2006 SC 3275} Three basic principles have been
laid down by courts based on which interim orders can be granted viz.

1. There should be a prima facie case in favour of the party who is

seeking the interim order,
 2. The balance of convenience should lie with the party who is
requesting the interim order,
3. If the interim order will not be passed by the court then the
party will have to face irreparable damage or loss and also it will
be troublesome to ascertain the loss in terms of money.

It is the responsibility of the court to strike a balance between the two

extreme positions. On the one hand, if the interim order is rejected, will
the petition itself become fruitless and on the other hand, if the interim
order is granted, then the other party may suffer huge losses and
hardships, considering that the losses suffered by the affected party, in
this case, are irreparable.[Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. vs.
Bombay Environmental Action Group & Ors. (2005) 5 SCC 61] So, various
other conditions have also been laid down which courts can weigh while
deciding petitions demanding grant of interim relief-

1. The scope of compensation should be sufficient as a remedy.

2. Protect the interests of the plaintiff from infringement of their
rights, considering the harm that may be suffered by the
defendant as a result of it.
3. In handling these applications, the court should not ignore that
one party has stronger factum strength of the case than the
other party.
4. While granting injunctions, there should not be any fixed rule or
concept, but granting should be based on the facts and
circumstances pertaining to each case (the relief should remain
flexible).
5. One should consider whether the plaintiff will or will not suffer
irreparable losses and injuries if the injunction will be refused,
keeping in mind the strength of the litigants.
6. Even if there are serious problems or preliminary evidence to
support the grant, the balance between convenience and
inconvenience should be considered a principal requisite.
7. Whether the grant or rejection of an injunction will adversely
affect the interest of the public which can or cannot be
compensated.[Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd. Vs. Hindustan Lever
Ltd., AIR 1999 SC 3105]

The court in Deoraj vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors has said that,
only when it is satisfied that the withholding of interim order will prick
the court’s conscience and violently violate judicial justice, causing
injustices to persist throughout the hearing, and the court will not be
able to maintain justice, the court can grant such temporary relief.

Non-Compliance of Interim
Order

Everyone must obey the final or interim order passed by the competent
court.

The party, against whom the order is passed, can take appropriate
measures to withdraw or revoke interim order if it believes that the order
does not comply with the law.

However, he cannot refuse to follow the order.

Failure to take seriously the violation of the order passed by the court
will have a wide range of harmful effects on the court’s authority to
execute such orders.

Willful disobedience to the court’s instructions will constitute contempt

of the court.

If a person does not obey the court’s order then the court can also refuse
to hear the person’s opinion.

Interim Order under CPC

Interim orders under CPC may be condensed under-

1. Payment in Court: Order 24

In a suit for debt or damages, it is open to the defendant that he can

deposit such sum of money as he considers a satisfaction in full of the
plaintiff’s claim at any stage of the proceeding of the matter. If the
plaintiff accepts the money when it fully meets its requirements, the
court shall record its statement and pronounce its judgment accordingly.
[10] On the other hand, if the plaintiff accepts the payment as a
satisfactory amount in part of his claim, he has the right to file a lawsuit
to recover the balance. However, if it is finally found that the deposit
fully meets the requirements of the plaintiff, the plaintiff shall pay all
expenses incurred after the deposit.[State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur v.
Abdul Wahid, AIR 2003 Raj 61]

2. Security for Costs: Order 25

It is pointed out in Order XXV Rule 1 that the court can order the
plaintiff to provide security at any stage of the litigation to pay the costs
incurred by the defendant. The court can exercise this power at the
request of the defendant or can take a suo moto cognizance. However,
the court should make this order in the following circumstances:

1. The plaintiff lives outside of India, or there are two or more

plaintiffs, and they all live outside of India; and
2. The sole plaintiff or no plaintiff owns sufficient real estate other
than litigation property in India.[Or. 25 R. 1]

The purpose of this rule is to provide protection to defendants in some

instances, where if the case became successful from the side of the
defendant, they may have difficulty in realizing their costs from the
plaintiff.[Vinod Seth v. Devinder Bajaj, (2010) 8 SCC 1]

3. Commissions: Order 26
Section 75 to 78 of the CPC deals with the power of the court to issue a
commission, which has been further detailed in Order 26 of the Code.
The power of the court to issue commissions can be exercised by the
court on its discretion. The court establishes complete justice between
the parties. The court can exercise this right at the request of the parties
involved in the litigation or by a suo moto action. According to Section
75, a court may issue a commission for any of the following purposes:

1. to examine witnesses (Sections 76-78; Order 26 Rules 1-83),

2. to make local investigation (Rules 9 and 10);
3. to adjust accounts (Rules 11 and 12);
4. to make a partition (Rules 13 and 14);
5. to hold investigation (Rule 10-A);
6. to perform a ministerial act (Rule 10-B); or
7. to conduct sale (Rule 10-C)

Evidentiary value of the report

The commissioner’s report will provide preliminary evidence about the

facts and data collected by the commissioner. It will constitute
important evidence and cannot be rejected unless there are sufficient
grounds to do so.

No restriction on the Supreme

Court and High Court

The limitations given under section 79 and order 26 concerning the

issuance of the commission did not apply to the Supreme Court and
High Court in the exercise of their constitutional powers.

4. Arrest before Judgment: Order

38
Generally, the arrest of an accused (as the execution of decree) took
place after passing of the decree but in certain exceptional cases, an
accused can be arrested before passing of the judgment. The main
purpose of this order is to prevent the defendant from making any
attempt to defeat or escape from any liability imposed by the court on
him and protect the interest of the plaintiff.

Since the arrest of the defendant before passing the judgment in favour
of the plaintiff is an extreme action so it should be performed with due
care and caution. The court before passing such an order should ensure
that if this order will not be passed then there is a real danger of losing
the defendant and his property as the defendant can remove them from
the jurisdiction of the court. So, the court should always look at Rule 1
before passing any order requiring the arrest of the defendant before
judgment. Rule 1 laid down-

Where, at any stage of the litigation, an affidavit or other means is used

to satisfy the court that-

1. the defendant intentionally delays the plaintiff or avoids any

court procedure, or hinders or delays the execution of any
decree that the litigation may take against him,

1. absconded or has left the local limits of the court’s

jurisdiction, or
2. is about to abscond or left the local restrictions of the
court’s jurisdiction, or
3. has disposed of or removed its property or any part of its
property from the local restrictions of the court’s
jurisdiction,

2. When there is a reasonable possibility that the defendant will

leave India and obstruct or delay the enforcement of any decree
passed against the defendant by the court and hinders the
interest of the plaintiff. The court can issue an arrest warrant
against the defendant, arrest the defendant, and bring him to
the court to show the reason why he should not provide a
guarantee for his appearance in court. However, if the
defendant pays to the officer (executing the warrant) the
 amount specified in the bond sufficient to satisfy the plaintiff’s
claim, he shall not be arrested.

Cases where arrest before

judgment is not allowed

An order to arrest the defendant before judgment cannot be obtained in

1. any land or immovable property suit as specified in Article 16 (a)

to (d) of the Code, or
2. to convert unsecured debt into secured debt to ensure easy
enforcement of laws

Conditions necessary to be fulfilled

There are two conditions about which court should be satisfied before
passing this order-

1. The plaintiff’s lawsuit must be in good faith, and the cause of the
lawsuit must be ostensibly irrefutable, but the premise is that he
must prove the accusation in the plaint,
2. the court must have reason to believe that unless this
extraordinary power is exercised there is a real danger that the
defendant will remove himself or his property from the scope of
the court’s power.

The plaintiff can put an application for arrest at any time after the plaint
is presented, even before a summon is served to the defendant.

5. Attachment before Judgment:

Order 38, Rule 5- 13
Similar to arrest before judgment, the court in certain conditions may
order attachment before judgment. The main purpose of attachment
before the judgment is to prevent the defendant from attempting to
undermine, execution of the decree against him.

If at any stage of the litigation, the court satisfies through an affidavit or

other means that the defendant to prevent or delay the enforcement of an
order that may be directed against him,

1. Is about to remove or dispose of the whole or any part of his

property. Or
2. Remove all or any part of its property from the local restrictions
of the court’s jurisdiction; the court may instruct the defendant
within a time determined by the court to provide a bond of the
amount specified in the order and sufficient to satisfy the decree
and ask the defendant to appear and show the reason why it
should not provide a guarantee.

Unless the court directs otherwise, the plaintiff should specify the
property which is to be attached with its estimated value. The court can
also order all or any part of the property to be directly and conditionally
attached. If an attachment order is issued that does not comply with
Rule 5(1), the attachment will be invalid.

The court cannot order the attachment or production of any agricultural

products owned by agriculturists.

6. Temporary Injunctions: Order 39

An injunction is a remedy issued to a person in the form of a court order

that prohibits the person from engaging in or continuing to perform a
specific act or ordering him to perform a certain act. The main purpose
of granting interim relief is to retain the disputed property until the court
determines the legal rights and conflicting requirements of the parties.
Types of Injunction

Injunctions can be classified into various types-

A permanent injunction will forever restrict a party from performing a

specified act, and a ruling can only be granted on the merits of the case
after the hearing of both parties is over. On the other hand, a temporary
injunction restricts the parties temporarily from not performing specified
actions and can only be approved before the litigation or until a further
court order is dealt with.

Injunctions will be preventive if they prevent, prohibit or restrict

someone from doing something; or mandatory when they force or
order someone to do something.

An ad interim injunction order is granted without a final decision on the

injunction order and remains effective until the application is processed.
Usually, an interim injunction is granted while finally deciding the main
application and the injunction will continue until the litigation is dealt
with.

When a Temporary Injunction may

be Passed?

The temporary injunction may be granted by the court in the following

cases-

1. If any property in dispute in the litigation is in danger of being

wasted, damaged, or transferred by either party in the litigation,
or is in danger of being wrongly sold as a result of the execution
of the law; or
2. The defendant threatens or intends to remove or dispose of his
property to defraud his creditors or
 3. The defendant threatens to dispose of the plaintiff or otherwise
harm the plaintiff with respect to any property disputed in the
lawsuit, or
4. The defendant is about to breach the contract or any other form
of injury; or
5. The court considers that it is in the interest of justice.

Conditions needed to be fulfilled

Before issuing an injunction, the court must be satisfied with the

following conditions which are also known as three pillars on which the
foundation of the order of injunction rests:

 Does the plaintiff have prima facie evidence?

 If the court does not accept the prayer of the temporary
injunction, will the plaintiff suffer irreparable harm?
 Does the balance of inconvenience benefit the plaintiff?

7. Interlocutory Orders: Order 39

Rule 6 of Order 39 authorizes the court to order, in certain conditions,

the sale and purchase of perishable goods. Rule 7 empowers courts to
authorize any person to enter into any land or building owned by any
party for sampling, observation, or experimentation for detention,
preservation, or inspection of the property which is the subject matter of
the suit. Rule 8 requires courts, before making such an order, to notify
the other party, unless it appears that the purpose of making such an
order will be defeated due to delay. If the land involved in the suit is
liable to pay the government revenue, and the party that owns the land
neglects to pay the income, any other party in the litigation claiming an
interest in the land can immediately pay for the property and get
possession of that property after paying the income. The court may
award in the decree the amount so paid and interest on it to be paid
against the defaulter. If one party admits that he holds the money as a
trustee for another party, then the court can order him to deposit the
money in the court.
8. Receiver: Order 40

A receiver is an independent person appointed by the court between the

parties to the litigation. He can accept the funds or property in the
litigation, whenever it is believed by the court that it is unreasonable for
either of the party to hold property or funds. The main object behind
appointing a receiver is to preserve, protect, and manage the property of
the suit and safeguard the interests of both litigants involved in
litigation, in the course of the pendency of the litigation.

When the court can appoint a

receiver?

1. It is at the discretion of the court to appoint a receiver.

2. Appointment of a receiver is a protective relief and the purpose
is to preserve the disputed property before the determination of
the rights of the litigants by the judiciary.
3. A receiver will not be allotted lest the plaintiff’s prima facie
evidence proves that he is likely to succeed in the lawsuit.
4. This is one of the most severe remedies provided by the law for
the enforcement of rights, so it should not be taken lightly. Since
it deprives the other party of ownership of the property before
the announcement of final judgment, it should only be used to
prevent obvious errors or harm. The courts will never appoint
receivers solely because it will not cause any harm.
5. Generally, in situations that may cause the defendant to suffer
irreparable losses, if there is a receiver order that will deprive
the defendant of the defendant’s de facto property, then the
court may not pass an order to appoint a receiver.
6. If no one has the right of enjoyment of the property and it is also
proved with the help of adequate pieces of evidence then it will
be in the common interest of all the litigants to appoint a
receiver.
7. The court is required to make sure that the party approaching
court for the appointment of the receiver should come with no
malafide intentions.
Powers of Receiver

The court may grant any of the following power to the receiver-

1. File a lawsuit and defend it;

2. Realize, manage, protect, preserve and improve property;
3. Collect, use and dispose of profits and rents;
4. Executing documents; or
5. These powers that it considers appropriate.

Liability of Receiver

If the receiver fails to give in to the account or is unable to pay the

outstanding amount, or due to deliberate breach of contract or
negligence caused damage to the goods then the court may instruct the
seizure and sale of any of his property, and make up any money due to
him.