Bombay HC Upholds ₹2.5 Lakh Costs Against Mumbai Khadi Association For Injunction Breach

In brief

The question

1. Whether the Single Judge could direct payment of litigation costs under Section 151 CPC for an established breach of an injunction when Order XXXIX Rule 2A prescribes consequences for such breach.

The court held

The Court rejected the challenge to the costs direction.

It also directed

The Court disposed of the appeal and pending interim applications. It noted that the costs had already been paid.

01Facts

KVIC filed an application under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure, alleging that the Board of Trustees of the Mumbai Khadi & Village Industries Association (MKVIA) had wilfully circumvented an injunction granted on 14 December 2022.

p. 2 · ¶ 2 · p. 3 · ¶ 4

The Single Judge found a breach, restrained MKVIA from hosting or promoting events relating to “Khadi,” and directed it to pay KVIC Rs. 2,50,000 in litigation costs under Section 151 CPC.

p. 2 · ¶ 2 · p. 3 · ¶ 4

Trustee Naresh D. Bhuta appealed the costs direction, contending that Section 151 could not be invoked where Order XXXIX Rule 2A provided a specific remedy.

p. 3 · ¶ 3

02Issues

i.1. Whether the Single Judge could direct payment of litigation costs under Section 151 CPC for an established breach of an injunction when Order XXXIX Rule 2A prescribes consequences for such breach.

p. 3 · ¶ 3

ii.2. Whether the costs direction was unlawful in the circumstances of the case.

p. 4 · ¶ 5

03Law Applied

Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC empowers the court, upon disobedience of an injunction or breach of its terms, to attach the property of the person responsible and/or detain that person in civil prison for up to three months; subsection (2) addresses the duration of attachment and the possible award of compensation from sale proceeds.

pp. 2–3 · ¶ 3

Section 151 CPC preserves the court’s inherent powers.

The Court held that the costs direction under challenge disclosed no illegality in the circumstances, while indicating that any further infringement would be dealt with under the procedure in Rule 2A.

p. 4 · ¶ 5

Provisions in the judgment · 1 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Section 151

04Reasoning

The Court accepted that Rule 2A provides specified measures for dealing with breach of an injunction.

p. 3 · ¶ 4

However, the Single Judge had directed payment of costs to compensate KVIC for the expense of bringing the breach to the Court’s attention and enforcing the interim order.

p. 3 · ¶ 4

The Division Bench found no illegality in that direction, noting that Rule 2A would be followed if there were any further infringement or violation.

p. 4 · ¶ 5