Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 39, 42, 54

Law: Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Section: O. XXXIX Rr. 1, 2, O. XLIII R. 1, S. 104

Specific Relief Act, 1877 (I of 1877)-- ----Ss. 39, 42 & 54--Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908), O. XXXIX Rr. 1 & 2, O. XLIII R. 1 & S. 104--Cancellation of agreement--Temporary injunction--Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2, CPC--Prima facie case--Balance of convenience--Irreparable loss--Bona fide purchaser--Transfer to third party--Status quo--Discretionary relief--Suit as well as application was contested by respondents (defendants), who filed their written statement and opposed claim of petitioners (plaintiffs), whereafter learned trial Court, after hearing parties, dismissed application u/O. XXXIX Rr. 1 & 2, CPC--Initially, ad-interim relief was granted whereby respondents were restrained from transferring or creating any third-party interest in suit property and were directed to maintain status quo; however, subsequently said ad-interim order was vacated--It was observed that respondent No.1 had already sold out suit property to a third party and when suit property had already been transferred, petitioners had failed to fulfill requirements of O. XXXIX Rr. 1 & 2, CPC--It was prescription of law that all three essential ingredients i.e. prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss had to be present together for grant of injunction and absence of any one of them was fatal to such relief--Learned trial Court had passed a well-reasoned order which did not call for any interference by this Court; therefore, petition being without merits was hereby dismissed--Petition dismissed. [Pp. 83 & 84] A, B, C, D Mr. Behlol Khan Kasi, Advocate for Appellants. Mr. Muhammad Sharif, Advocate for Respondent No. 1. Mr. Sultan Barrech, Asstt: A.G for Official Respondents. Date of hearing: 5.12.2025. Judgment Through this civil appeal, the petitioners (plaintiffs) have assailed the order dated 12.06.2025 (the “impugned order”), passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge-IV, Quetta (the “trial Court”), whereby the application under Order XXXIX rule 1&2, CPC filed by the petitioners was dismissed. 2.       Facts of the case are that the petitioners (plaintiffs) have filed a suit for…