Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.XXXIX,r.1,2,S.115

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.XXXIX,r.1,2,S.115

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 56(a)

Specific Relief Act (1 of 1877)-------Ss. 12 & 56(a)---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.115 & O.XXXIX, Rr.1, 2---Interim injunction, grant of---Judicial proceedings---Plaintiff claimed to have entered into agreement to sell with the owners of suit land, against whom defendant had sought decree for possession through pre-emption---Decree passed in favour of defendant in pre-emption suit was maintained upto Supreme Court---Suit filed by plaintiff was dismissed by Trial Court and Appellate Court declined to grant interim injunction---Validity---Plaintiff simply claimed agreement to sell from the owners which did not create any right, title or interest in the suit property---Suit of plaintiff, for specific performance had already been dismissed by Trial Court and and decree of Trial Court was subject to scrutiny in appeal before Appellate Court---Plaintiff had no prima facie arguable case in his favour---Injunction sought could not be issued to obstruct lawful execution proceedings in view of the provisions of S.56 (a) of Specific Relief Act, 1877---Even otherwise if plaintiff was deprived of his claimed possession, he could have it back through process of court in case of his success in his suit for specific performance---No probability of any irreparable loss/injury to plaintiff, whereas the same would ensue to the benefit of defendant, who could not be deprived of usufruct of suit property, in spite of the fact that its entire price had already been deposited---Balance of convenience was also in favour of defendant and there was no chance of any inconvenience to plaintiff---Controversy was correctly put to rest by Appellate Court, without committing any error of law/facts---Order passed by Appellate Court was not tainted with any illegality, irregularity and the same was not amenable to interference under S.115 C.P.C.---High Court declined to interfere with the order passed by Appellate Court, whereby interim injunction was declined---Revision was dismissed in circumstances. Muhammad Ramzan Wattoo for Petitioner. ORDER MUHAMMAD MUZAMMAL KHAN, J.--- Instant civil revision assailed the order, dated 6-12-2006 recalling/vacating the status quo order…

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