In which of the following case would the Court not grant perpetual injunction when the defendant invades or threatens to invade the plaintiffs right to, or enjoyment of property?
A. Where the defendant is the agent of the plaintiff
B. Where compensation in money would not afford adequate relief
C. Where it is necessary to prevent multiplicity of judicial proceedings
D. Where there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual loss caused to the plaintiff
Answer: Option A
This Question Belongs to Law >> Specific Relief Act
Which section of the Specific Relief Act provides for grant of temporary and permanent injunctions:
A. Section 35
B. Section 36
C. Section 37
D. None of the above
Which of the following statements is wrong? Perpetual injunction
A. Is granted by a decree
B. Can be granted without notice to and hearing the defendant
C. Can never be granted without notice to and hearing the defendant
D. Can be granted on merits only
Suit for specific performance is claimed when applicant is . . . . . . . . .
A. Necessary party
B. Proper party
C. Neither (A) nor (B)
D. Both (A) and (C)
A. In a contract, where plaintiff has been given an unfair advantage over the defendant
B. In a case where the contract is not enforceable at the instance of the other party
C. Where the defendant entered into the contract under circumstances which though not rendering the contract voidable, makes it inequitable to enforce specific performance
D. Where performance of the contract would involve some hardship on the defendant which he did not foresee, whereas its non-performance would involve no such hardship on the plaintiff
Join The Discussion