Specific Relief Act (SRA)
Specific Performance versus Injunction
Specific performance and injunction are the two great forms of specific relief: in each the court acts on the person, compelling or restraining conduct, rather than awarding money. Specific performance makes a party perform a positive obligation, almost always under a contract; an injunction restrains a party from breaching an obligation, whether it arises from a contract, a trust or a property right. This note explains each in its own right, compares them, works through an example, and shows where they overlap under Section 42.
Figure: Specific performance and injunction compared, and where the two meet under Section 42
1. Specific Performance in Its Own Right
Specific performance is the affirmative relief of Chapter II. It compels a party to a contract to do the very act he promised, most typically to convey land, transfer shares, or complete a sale. Its source is almost always a contract, and the court is guided by the rules of that chapter: a valid contract, the plaintiff's readiness and willingness, and the absence of a statutory bar. Since 2018 it is the rule the court shall enforce.
2. Injunction in Its Own Right
An injunction is the preventive relief of Part III. In its perpetual form it restrains a party from doing, or continuing to do, what would breach an obligation existing in the plaintiff's favour. It is chiefly negative in direction, though it has an affirmative form, the mandatory injunction. Its source is wider than contract: it may protect a right under a trust, a property right such as an easement, or any legal obligation. It is discretionary and is refused on the grounds set out in Section 41.
The reach of the injunction ▪ Perpetual and temporary. A perpetual injunction is final relief by the decree; a temporary injunction, under Order XXXIX of the Code, holds the position pending the suit. ▪ Prohibitory and mandatory. It may restrain an act, or, in its mandatory form under Section 39, compel a positive act to undo a wrong. ▪ Wide sources. It protects contracts, trusts, easements, and legal obligations generally, not contracts alone. |
3. The Two Reliefs Compared
Basis | Specific performance | Injunction (perpetual) |
|---|---|---|
What it does | Compels a party to perform his positive obligation under a contract | Restrains a party from doing, or continuing, what would breach an obligation |
Direction | Affirmative: do the thing you promised | Chiefly negative: do not do this |
Governing part | Chapter II, Sections 9 to 25 | Part III, Sections 36 to 42 |
Source of the duty | Almost always a contract | A contract, a trust, a property right, or any legal obligation |
Typical use | Conveyance of land, transfer of shares, completion of a sale | Restraining trespass, protecting an easement, enforcing a negative covenant |
Discretion | The rule after 2018, subject to Sections 11(2), 14 and 16 | Discretionary, refused on the grounds in Section 41 |
4. Where They Meet
The contract with a negative term ▪ Both are specific reliefs. The court acts on the person rather than awarding money: specific performance makes a party do the promised act, an injunction makes him not do the forbidden one. ▪ Section 42 is the bridge. Where a contract has an affirmative agreement coupled with a negative one, the court may enforce the negative promise by injunction even though it cannot compel the affirmative one. ▪ The limit. The injunction runs only while the contract subsists; a post-termination restraint void under Section 27 of the Contract Act cannot be enforced. |
5. A Worked Example
A singer contracts to sing at a particular theatre for a season, and agrees not to sing anywhere else during that time. The affirmative promise, to sing, cannot be specifically enforced, because it depends on personal skill and falls within Section 14; the court will not compel the singer to perform. But the negative promise, not to sing elsewhere, can be enforced by an injunction under Section 42, restraining the singer from performing for a rival during the season, provided the theatre has kept its own side of the bargain. Here specific performance fails on the positive obligation while an injunction succeeds on the negative one, and the two reliefs meet in the same contract.
6. Frequently Asked Questions
Q. What is the difference between specific performance and an injunction?
A. Specific performance compels a party to perform a positive contractual obligation; an injunction restrains a party from breaching an obligation, and is chiefly negative in form.
Q. Can both be sought in the same case?
A. Yes, where a contract has both an affirmative and a negative term. Under Section 42 the negative promise may be enforced by injunction even where the affirmative part cannot be specifically enforced.
Q. Which part of the Act governs each?
A. Specific performance is governed by Chapter II, Sections 9 to 25; injunctions by Part III, Sections 36 to 42.
Q. Are both discretionary?
A. Specific performance is now the rule after 2018, subject to the statutory bars; an injunction remains discretionary and is refused on the grounds in Section 41.
SEO METADATA URL slug: specific-performance-vs-injunction-specific-relief-act SEO title: Specific Performance versus Injunction Meta description: Specific performance versus injunction under the Specific Relief Act: the positive relief and the preventive relief each explained, a worked example, the governing parts, and the overlap under Section 42. Keywords: specific performance vs injunction, positive vs negative relief, Section 42 negative covenant, Chapter II vs Part III, forms of specific relief |