MULTAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY through its Director General vs MUHAMMAD RAMZAN and 8 others
This matter arises from nine petitions for leave to appeal filed against the acceptance of respondents' Civil Revisions by the High Court regarding interim relief in pending suits. The core legal question concerns the circumstances under which the Supreme Court should interfere with the discretionary interim orders passed by the High Court. The Supreme Court held that it seldom interferes with orders determining interim relief unless there is a grave illegality, a clear abuse of process, or a gross injustice easily discoverable. Furthermore, the High Court had adequately safeguarded the interests of the petitioner authority by directing the trial court to expedite the proceedings and conclude the suits within six months. The key principle laid down is that the Supreme Court will not interfere with the discretionary exercise of interim jurisdiction by the High Court absent a grave illegality or gross injustice, particularly when the High Court has taken care to protect the rights of the parties through expedited trial directions. Consequently, the petitions were dismissed.
- Under what circumstances will the Supreme Court interfere with interim relief orders passed by the High Court?
- Does the mere possibility of a different opinion by the Supreme Court justify interference with the High Court's discretionary interim orders?
- Whether the Supreme Court will interfere with an interim order where the High Court has taken care to safeguard the petitioner's interest through expedited trial directions?
ORDER
1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought in these nine petitions; against the acceptance by the High Court of respondents' Civil Revisions which had arisen in relation to interim relief sought by the respondents/plaintiffs in their suits which are stated to be still pending.
2. The learned Judge in the High Court in a joint but very detailed order dealt with the question of temporary injunction, sought by the respondents side, in an adequate manner. The mere fact that this Court might after full hearing be- of different opinion on one or the other questions amongst many dealt with by the High Court, would by itself not justify to interfere with the orders passed by the High Court in its discretionary jurisdiction. This Court seldom interferes with such like orders determining the interim relief. It has also to be kept in view that unless a grave illegality, a clear abuse of process or a gross injustice, is easily discoverable, this Court would not interfere with the orders of the High Court which determine the question and/or extent of interim relief in a case. In the' present matter there is an additional factor also; namely, that the learned Judge in the High Court took meticulous care to safeguard the interest of the petitioner authority, by making the following observation:- "I have noticed that the suits are pending since 1984 and the matter is still at the stage of the decision of question of issuance of temporary injunction. Learned counsel for the petitioners stated at the Bar that they were not interested to prolong the matter and undertook to conclude their evidence within three months. The trial court is hereby directed to expedite the proceedings in the suits and dispose them of within six months from the date of receipt. Of this judgment and report compliance of this direction to this Court."
3. We have been informed that the cases are still pending. Although no complaint has been made against the learned trial Court yet we feel that the petitioner should bring to the notice of the learned trial Judge the need for 'very early disposal of the case, in accordance with directions of the High Court. A copy of the application so made shall also be sent to the learned Judge who rendered the impugned judgment for whatever action/order, necessary in the 'supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court.
4. ' With the foregoing observations, these petitions are dismissed.
Cited by 3 cases
- Khawaja Adnan Zafar vs Hina Bashir and others 2024 SCP 142, 2024 SCMR 1295
- Attiq Ur Rehman vs Sh. Tahir Mehmood and others 2023 SCMR 501
- M/s. MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN AND LALA RAM vs M/s. MUMTAZ ALI AND 1995 SCMR 251