DINESH MATHUR vs O.P. ARORA

The Supreme Court held that the balance of convenience does not favor granting an ad-interim injunction against the appellant, who has been running a hotel since 1937. The Court emphasized that the matter of whether the appellant violated lease conditions is to be determined in the suit itself, and that the appellant could suffer irremediable injury if the injunction were granted. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal, dissolved the ad-interim injunction, and directed the trial court to expedite the suit's disposal.