Law:

Section:

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)- ---.---O.XXXIX, Rr.1 & 2---.---Specific Relief Act (1 of 1877), Ss.42 & 54---.---Suit for declaration and permanent injunction---.--- Contract to install hydrants---.---Temporary injunction, grant of---.---Scope---.---If defendant had breached the contract, plaintiff could ascertain damages likely to be caused in result of such breach---.---Breach of contract did not advance the case of plaintiffs for grant of an injunction---.---Matter with regard to contract as in the present case because under discussion before the Supreme Court observations had been passed therein---.---High Court could not take any exception to such observations given by the Supreme Court---.---Plaintiffs having no case for grant of injunction, application for grant of injunction was dismissed. Mirza Shaukat Baig v. Shahid Jamil PLD 2005 SC 530 rel. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: SALAHUDDIN PANHWAR, JUSTICE:---.------ By the dint of this order I intend to decide applications under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. separately filed in captioned suits. 2. Precisely, relevant facts are that plaintiffs filed constitution petition with regard to water hydrants before the Division Bench of this Court, wherein ad-interim injunction was granted but at later stage same were, disposed of with directions that since the issue relates to factual controversy, hence petitioners/ plaintiffs shall approach original jurisdiction of this Court, however, ad-interim injunction was extended upto today i.e. 10.02.2016. 3. At the outset learned counsel for the plaintiffs contended that defendant No.1 without any justification intend to close the hydrants owned by the plaintiffs on the plea that same are illegal and there is direction of the apex Court for closure of all illegal hydrants. It is further contended that the plaintiffs, with the approval of the competent authority (defendants), entered into a contract; paid millions of rupees and pursuant to that these hydrants on main pipe lines of defendant No.1 were allowed to be operated; impugned action of the defendants is against the natural justice; defendant No.1 is not competent to cancel the contracts without hearing the…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492