عارضی حکم امتناعی ،، مدت ایک سال تک

 Interim injunction. Expiry.

PLD 2019 Lahore 295

O-XXXIX, R-2-B [as amended by the Lahore High Court]. Temporary injunction ceased to have effect upon expiration of the period of one year as envisaged by O-XXXIX, R-2-B, CPC In the present case, a period of more than one year had lapsed between the passing of the temporary injunction, in favour of plaintiffs by the Trial Court and the passing of the impugned decision by the appellate Court, whereby the temporary injunction was confirmed. As such, at the time of the decision by the appellate Court there was no temporary injunction in the field in favour of the plaintiffs. Nothing was available on the record to show that the defendants had moved application in termsof R-2-B of O-XXXIX, CPC for extension of the order of temporary injunction granted in their favour nor for that matter the order was extended nor was there any report to that effect before the High Court. Similarly there was nothing on the record to show that the said order was suspended by the appellate Court in the plaintiffs' appeal since by operation of law there was no temporary injunction in the field. Plaintiffs' appeal before the appellate Court in fact had become infructuous. Revision petition was dismissed being incompetent with the observation that defendants, if advised, may move an application under the provisions of R-2-B of O-XXXIX, CPC before the trial Court for extension and/or Re~issuance of a temporary injunction in their favour. Raja Talat Mahmood v. Ismat Ehtishamul Haq 1999-SCMR-2215; District Collector, Bannu and 4 others v. Muhammad Subhan and 3 others 2008-CLC-1568 and Xen PESCO (WAPDA) Mansehra through Chairman, PESCO and 4 others v. Gas Masters CNG Filling Station, Mansehra through Khalid Latif and others PLD 2005-Peshawar-132 ref.

{PLD 2019 Lahore 295}, Before Mamoon Rashid Sheikh, J, Muhammad Safdar etc. vs. Muhammad Naseer Haider etc.