JUDGMENT Thomas, C.J. and Ghulam Hasan, J. - This appeal is filed by the plaintiff against an order dated the 13th September, 1945, passed by the Civil Judge of Lucknow refusing to grant a temporary injunction in a suit for a declaration. 2. The facts are few and simple. Rai Bahadur Raja Maheshwar Dayal Seth plaintiff is a member of the British Indian Association. He stood for election to the office of the President, which is to be held on the 19th September, 1945. The/rival candidates are Raja Sri Amar Krishna Narain Singh of Ramnagar and Dewan Kamakhya Dutt Ram taluqdar of Rasulpur. The term of the outgoing President, who is the Hon'ble Raja Yuvraj Dutt Singh of Order is to expire on the 2nd October. Under the Regulations of the Association the' President acted as the Returning Officer. Nomination papers were filed/by the respective candidates, more than one nomination paper being filed for the plaintiff. These were filed on the 3rd September and the scrutiny was held on the 5th September. An objection was raised by the Raja of Ramnagar to the plaintiff's nomination on the ground that the plaintiff had relinquished his titles of "Rai Bahadur" and "Raja" and the nomination paper wrongly prefixed the titles to his name. The electoral roll contained the name of the plaintiff with his titles. The Raja repudiated the allegation that he had relinquished the titles and it does not appear that his identity was disputed. The Returning Officer upheld the objection and rejected the nomination, leaving only two competitors in the field. This election is due to take place on the 19th September. The plaintiff thereupon filed a suit on the 11th September for a declaration that (a) he has been duly nominated as a candidate for seeking election as President of the British Indian Association and that his nomination paper has been illegally and unjustly rejected by the defendant No. 1, and (b) that an injunction be issued to defendants Nos. 1 to 5 who are the President, British Indian Association of Oudh, the Vice- President, British Indian Association the Raja of Ramnagir and Dewan Kamakhya Dutt Ram not to proceed with the election without permitting the plaintiff also to participate in the same. 1 to 5 who are the President, British Indian Association of Oudh, the Vice- President, British Indian Association the Raja of Ramnagir and Dewan Kamakhya Dutt Ram not to proceed with the election without permitting the plaintiff also to participate in the same. In the plaint the plaintiff characterized the order of the Returning Officer as illegal and Ultra Vires and asserted that he was deprived of his civil right to seek election as President of the British Indian Association. Along with the plaint the plaintiff field an application for temporary injunction restraining the defendants from holding the election on the 19th September, 1945, under Order XXXIX rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 3. The Civil Judge refused the prayer. He did not enter into the question of merits and relying upon certain decisions held that the issue of a temporary injunction would cause much inconvenience to the other candidates as well as to the voters of the Association. He further held that there was no inseparable loss likely to be caused to the plaintiff and the inconvenience caused to him will be comparatively small. As regards the plea about the maintainability of the suit, which was argued before him, he expressed the view that he could not say for certain at that stage that the suit was maintainable. 4. Along with the appeal filed in this Court an application was filed for the issue of a temporary injunction staying the election till the disposal of the appeal. In view of the urgency of the matter the appeal was fixed for hearing with the consent of parties yesterday. 5. We have heard lengthy arguments on both sides upon the question whether the suit is maintainable in the Civil Court, the plaintiff contending that his suit is one of a civil nature in which the right to an office is contested within the meaning of section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the defendants denying that a relief of the kind asked for by the plaintiff could be granted either u/s 9 of the CPC or u/s 42 of the Specific Relief Act. Both parties have referred to large number of cases in support of their respective contentions. Both parties have referred to large number of cases in support of their respective contentions. We may say at once that we are not prepared to express any view in the matter, as it will prejudge the principal issue arising in the case and anything which we might say may embarrass the trial Judge in the decision of the case, nor does it appear to us necessary that the question should be gone into in such detail as learned Counsel for both part us have attempted to do. It is sufficient for the purposes of deciding the interlocutory application for the issue of a temporary injunction to examine whether the plaintiff prima facie has a question to raise at the trial which can be investigated by the civil Court. The question appears to us to be arguable and we will not be prepared to throw out the application for injunction by prejudging the matters at this stage. We do not, therefore, propose to discuss the judicial decisions to which reference has been made on both sides. 6. Order XXXIX rule 2(1) says ; - In any suit for restraining the defendant from committing a breach of contract or other injury of any kind, whether compensation is claimed in the suit or not. the plaintiff may, at any time after the commencement of the suit, and either before or after judgment, apply to the Court for a temporary injunction to restrain the defendant from committing the breach of contract or injury complained of or any breach of contract or injury of a like kind arising out of the same contract or relating to the same property or right. 7. The power of the Court to issue an injunction under this rule is not circumscribed by any limitations, but the power is not arbitrary and must be exercised according to sound judicial principles. 7. The power of the Court to issue an injunction under this rule is not circumscribed by any limitations, but the power is not arbitrary and must be exercised according to sound judicial principles. The principles upon which an injunction should be granted are firmly established in the various decisions, English and Indian, and seem to us to be well stated in Daily Gazette Press v. Karachi Municipality (1930) 127 IC 690, as follows : 1 The person who seeks the aid of the Court in that behalf must, as a rule, be able to satisfy the Court on three points: (1) that there is a serious question to be tried at the hearing, and there is a probability that he will be entitled to the relief sought by him, or in other words, that he has a prima facie case to go to trial, (2) that the Court's interference is necessary to protect him from tint species of injury which the Court calls irreparable before his legal right can be established on trial, and (8) that the comparative mischief or the inconvenience which is likely to arise from withholding the injunction will be greater than that which is likely to arise from granting it. 8. The rule that has been followed generally in other cases is which side the balance of convenience Judges. Judged by these criteria, we are not prepared to say that the discretion exercised by the Civil Judge was exercised unreasonably. The election is to be held tomorrow. We are informed that there are more than 400 voters and they have all been notified to c me and vote in the election A large number of them have already arrived at considerable expense and inconvenience from different par :s of Oudh If the election is postponed by the issue of an injunction, the candidates and the voters will be put to considerable inconvenience, while the inconvenience to the plaintiff will be relatively little. According to the rules of the British Indian Association, the President occupies a position of considerable authority. Indeed he has been referred to as the Chief Executive of the Association. Rule 18 empowers the President to call ordinary general meetings of the Association twice a year and The business to be transacted before the general meeting is mentioned in rule 19. Indeed he has been referred to as the Chief Executive of the Association. Rule 18 empowers the President to call ordinary general meetings of the Association twice a year and The business to be transacted before the general meeting is mentioned in rule 19. An extraordinary general meeting under rule 21 can be convened he the President alone on the requisition of 12 members. The meeting of the Executive Committee can similarly be convened by the President alone u/s 24. His duties are defined in rule 28 and these cover a vast field. Rule 42 requires all contracts and engagements entered into by the Association with others and vice versa to be executed in favour of the President and the Vice President. Suits are to be filed by the President and she Vice-President under rule 43. The highest amount which the President can spend within a year in case of urgent necessity is Rs. 2,000, while the Vice-President can spend Rs. 1,000 and the Secretary Rs. on (Vide rule 60). An affidavit has been filed before us by the Assistant Secretary of the Association to the effect that the financial year ends on the 30th September, the all sums required for extraordinary expenditure sanctioned by the Executive Committee over and above the budgeted amounts are drawn from banks under cheques issued by the President and that a sum of Rs. 6,000 is to be sent to England for the expenses of a case fought by the Association and certain other expenses are to be incurred in the months of October and November. It is alleged that if the injunction is issued, U will result in suspension of all business and activities of the Association. On the other hand, no loss or inconvenience will result to the plaintiff by the refusal of the injunction. The suit it elf is not likely to take much term. If the plaintiff succeeds and his decree is executable against the Association, the election will stand cancelled and a fresh election will take place between the two rival candidates and plaintiff. On the other hand, if the pi .in tiff fails he will have no cause of complaint. The suit it elf is not likely to take much term. If the plaintiff succeeds and his decree is executable against the Association, the election will stand cancelled and a fresh election will take place between the two rival candidates and plaintiff. On the other hand, if the pi .in tiff fails he will have no cause of complaint. We do not agree with the contention of the plaintiff that if a temporary injunction does not issue, the suit would be infructuous, though this in itself is not sufficient to warrant the issue of a temporary injunction vide North Western Railway Administration v. North Western Railway Union (1933) 14 Lah. 330. 9. It was argued on behalf of the plaintiff that the difficulties suggested by the defendants are merely illusory and that it is open to the Association to modify or amend its rules u/s 58 so as to corer the powers now vested in the President upon the Vice-President. We do not think that this is an easy matter. the quorum required for such a purpose must be not less than 60 and no rupee be modified, amended or repealed except with the approval of a three-fifth majority. The President will have to call an extraordinary general meeting under rule 21 if he considers it necessary or if 12 members send a requisition to him to convene such a meeting. Unless the rules are amended or altered in accordance with the procedure laid down by the rules, the Vice-President crime perform all the functions of the President. The president en no doubt delegate any of his towers to the Vice-President but these will endure long as long as the President is in office (vide is (g) ). Under rule 29 the only power the Vice President has is to conduct the meetings during the laser's absence but not after he has vacated office. An awkward situation* is therefore bound 1 to arise after the office is vacated on the 2nd October, 1915, and no President is elected. Another election to the holding of the -election of the President is that if the plaintiff succeeds and the election ii set said as null and void, all acts done by him during the interregnum will be of no binding force upon the Association. Another election to the holding of the -election of the President is that if the plaintiff succeeds and the election ii set said as null and void, all acts done by him during the interregnum will be of no binding force upon the Association. We do not think that the disposal of the suit will take long provided both parties genially co-operate with the trial Court in expediting it. No serious com locations in our opinion are likely to arise if the election is held. It they do, it will be open to the Association, as suggested on behalf of the plaintiff himself, to frame a rule valid King all acts by the President in the event of his election being declared invalid. 10. Upon a consideration o all the circumstances of the case, we are not satisfied that the balance of convenience is in favour of the issue of an injunction. Accordingly we dismiss this appeal with costs. Civil Misc. Application No, 951 of 1945 is also dismissed. 11. We should like to direct the Civil Judge to call for the written statement within a fortnight and fix the issues upon that date. He shall fix another date for evidence, which we are assured is likely to be very little, and dispose of the suit on that date, the parties are informed of this order and directed to attend the Court on the 21st September 1945.