Anton Piller Order
Anto Piller injunction originated in the Court of Appeal in England in Anton Piller KG v Manufacturing Processes Ltd. (Anton Piller K.G. v. Mfg Processes Ltd. {1976} All ER) and are ex parte orders which permit the plaintiff to enter the premises of the defendant for inspection or removal of critical evidence which could otherwise be destroyed by the defendant if it had forewarning of a legal action (Januki Kumari JB Rana v. Ashok Kumar, 2017 SCC). An Anton Piller order can be issued even if the property or person concerned is outside the jurisdiction of the court (Mohit Bhargava v, Bharat Bhushan Bhargava, 2007 SCC). The court can order a defendant to give permission to the plaintiff to enter the premises under the control of the defendant for the purposes of
(a) Inspecting documents or other articles; or
(b) taking custody of documents or other articles pending trial of the action or in aid of execution.
Such order is usually made ex parte, and because it involves an element of surprise, and is hence likely to operate drastically, is closely controlled by the court (Rank Film Distributors Ltd. v. Video Information Centre, 1982 AC). The three essential preconditions for the making of an Anton Piller order are: (Halsbury’s Laws of England, Vol. 11, 5th Edition)
(a) there must be an extremely strong prima facie case; (b) the damage, potential or actual, must be very serious for the applicant; and (c) there must be clear evidence that the defendant have in their possession incriminating documents or things, and that there is a real possibility that they may destroy such material before any application inter parties can be made. An Anton Piller order does not involve forcible entry but would make the defendant liable for contempt proceedings, if he disobeyed the order (1975 AII ER)
