ABDUL HAMID KHAN and 10 others vs Mst. RAJO BIBI and 9 others
This matter arises from two petitions directed against the dismissal by the High Court of the petitioners' First Appeals challenging the grant of temporary injunctions by the trial Court in suits for declaration filed by the respondents. The core legal question concerns the propriety of the High Court's treatment of First Appeals as Civil Revisions and whether observations made during interlocutory proceedings prejudice the main trial. The Supreme Court held that discretionary orders regarding temporary injunctions must not influence the course of the trial, and consequently refused leave to appeal while issuing clarifying observations to protect the petitioners' interests in the main case. The key principle laid down is that observations made in interlocutory orders pertaining to temporary injunctions shall not prejudice or influence the merits of the main suit during trial.
- Whether observations made in temporary injunction orders can influence the course of the main trial?
- Can the High Court treat First Appeals against temporary injunctions as Civil Revisions?
- Are discretionary orders passed on temporary injunction questions binding on the merits of the main case?
ORDER
1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.---These two petitions are directed against the dismissal by the High Court of petitioners' First Appeals against the grant of temporary injunction by the trial Court, on the filing of suits for declaration by the respondents side.
2. ' After pointing out that the learned Judge in the High Court treated the First Appeals as if they were Civil Revisions, learned counsel ultimately contended that the real grievance of the petitioners is that such observations have been made in the impugned orders which might prejudice the petitioners' interest in the main case.
3. After hearing him on this aspect it is directed that the discretionary orders passed on the question of temporary injunction by any of the Courts shall not influence the course of the trial. With these observations, leave to appeal is refused.