- (1.) THE plaintiff insists on the enforcement of the negative covenant and the defendants urge that their daily bread comes from the manufacture of cakes. The unravelling of the problem lies in the answer to the legal issue as to whether the Court is left with no discretion in the enforcement of the negative covenant.
(2.) THE plaintiff came to Court almost at the beginning of the season of good cheer and obtained an ex-parte order on December 12, 2007 in terms of prayer (a) and the appointment of a special officer in terms of prayer (b) of the petition. Prayer (a) restrained the defendants from manufacturing any product for any person other than the plaintiff. Prayer (b) permitted the special officer to keep a check on the activities at the defendants' factory. On December 20, 2007, upon the defendants being heard, the special officer was required to make a surprise visit to the defendants' manufacturing unit without giving notice to any of the parties.
(3.) THE defendants submit that their entire business has come to a standstill and the best season for cakes, despite this extended winter, is almost over. The defendant pleads that the Court is not bound to grant an injunction in every case to enforce a negative covenant and a prayer for injunction may be refused if it would indirectly compel the defendant to idleness or serve the plaintiff.;