NOOR MUHAMMAD And Another vs PUNJAB PROVINCE And 2 Other
This matter arises from petitions for leave to appeal filed by the plaintiffs against the dismissal of their civil revisions by the High Court, which had upheld the rejection of their applications for temporary injunction against the defendants. During the hearing, the petitioners' counsel conceded that their primary grievance stemmed from certain observations made in the refusal orders that could potentially prejudice their case during the trial. The Supreme Court addressed the core legal question of whether interim observations in interlocutory orders can prejudice a substantive trial on merits. The Court held that while the discretionary refusal of a temporary injunction was maintained and the petitions were dismissed as without merit, the observations made in the refusal orders shall not influence or affect the course of the trial before the lower court. The key principle laid down is that interlocutory observations regarding temporary injunctions are tentative and must not prejudice the independent adjudication of the suit on its merits.
- Whether observations made in an order refusing a temporary injunction can adversely affect the trial of the suit?
- Can a discretionary order refusing to grant a temporary injunction be interfered with when the grievance is limited to prejudicial interlocutory observations?
ORDER
1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.---Leave to appeal has been sought in these two petitions by the plaintiffs against the dismissal; by the High Court, of their Civil Revisions. They had arisen out of the rejection of the petitioners' applications for temporary injunction against the respondents/defendants.
2. After some arguments the learned counsel frankly stated that the real grievance of the petitioners is that certain observations have been made in the order refusing to grant temporary injunction which might adversely affect the case of the petitioners during the trial before the learned lower Court.
3. Accordingly, while dismissing these petitions as without merit in so far as the discretionary order of refusal to grant temporary injunction is concerned, it is observed that this and the other orders of refusal shall not influence the course of the trial of the suit. With these observations these petitions are dismissed.