Whether court can direct restoration of possession in proceeding under O 39 R 2A of CPC

*The settled proposition of law is that relief cannot be accorded to; what is exactly not prayed for and pleaded for the purpose.*

14. Admittedly, the court below disbelieved the alleged violation of the ad interim order of injunction on the ground that violation, if be any, was done under bona fide belief, presuming that there subsisted no ad interim order of injunction by reason of the stay order being granted in connection with C.O. No. 1059 of 2003 of *High Court, but proceeded to pass an order what was not even prayed for, directing opposite parties to restore possession of the dispossessed land to the petitioner/plaintiff within a stipulated period of time.*

15. *Order 39 Rule 2(A) of C.P.C. has taken care of the consequence for having caused disobedience or breach to the order of injunction by prescribing attachment of the property of the person making violation of the injunction order and further also for civil detention for a term not exceeding three months. So, attachment/civil detention for 03 months is the ultimate punishment provided for having made violation of the injunction order. There is however, no other punishment or eventualities even contemplated consequential to the order of attachment/civil detention, if any. Learned advocate for the appellant rightly pointed out that there could not be any order recorded by the court, what was neither pleaded nor prayer for.*

16. *Since the basic prayer of the petitioner/appellant in connection with Order 39 Rule 2(A) of C.P.C. was for attachment and/or civil detention of person causing violation of condition of the injunction order, what was supposed to be given in a case upon fulfillment of the condition mentioned in Order 39 of Rule 2(A) of C.P.C. itself, therefore, proof of condition, embedded in Order 39 of Rule 2(A) of C.P.C., is sine qua non to the determination of issue.*

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA*

C.O. No. 2941 of 2018

Decided On: 21.08.2019

 *Swapan Kumar Debnath Vs.  Indian Oil Corporation and Ors.*

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

*Subhasis Dasgupta, J.*

Citation: *AIR 2019 Cal 322*

#injunction

#breach

#order39rule2A