2025 PLP 1973 (MLD)
Fahim Ahmed Saeed and others — Appellants Versus Mian Humayun Mahmud and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2025 PLP 1973 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore (Rawalpindi Bench) |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Fahim Ahmed Saeed and others — Appellants Versus Mian Humayun Mahmud and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), (a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2025 PLP 1973 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), (a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2025 PLP 1973 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore (Rawalpindi Bench) bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2025 PLP 1973 (MLD) (Fahim Ahmed Saeed and others — Appellants Versus Mian Humayun Mahmud and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
O.XXXIX, Rr.1, 2 & O.XLIII, R.1(r)
Trial Court "turning down" the request for grant of ad-interim relief
"Turned down", terminology of
Scope
Trial Court should either accept or dismiss the request for grant of ad-interim relief and terminology of "turned down" is not to be used
Appellants filed a suit for declaration, recovery and permanent injunction along with an application under O.XXXIX, R.1 & 2 of C.P.C. for grant of temporary injunction but the Trial Court "turned down" their requests for grant of ad-interim relief
Without discussing the reasons/grounds taken by the Trial Court for "turning down" the appellants' request for grant of temporary injunction the terminology "turned down" was not to be used in deciding application under O.XXXIX, R.1 & 2 of C.P.C. and the Trial Court should accept or dismiss it
Order XXXIX, R.1 & 2 of C.P.C. provided that court could grant a temporary injunction to restrain a party from committing an act that could cause injury to the other party or damage to the subject matter of the suit on specific terms, such as duration, keeping an account or providing security
Impugned order of Trial Court suffered from a legal lacuna and it could not be sustained and the same was set-aside
Appellants' application for grant of temporary injunction was deemed to be pending before the Trial Court for decision afresh
Appeal against order was disposed of, in circumstances.
O.XXXIX, Rr.1, 2, O.XLIII, R.1(r)
Appeal against order of Trial Court refusing to grant ad-interim relief
Order of Trial Court suffering from legal lacuna
High Court dispensing with the requirement of issuingnotice to opposite side to promote the principle of speedy justice
Under the doctrine of limine control for early and expeditious disposal of a case, the court can decide the matter at limine stage on the basis of material/documents available on the record/file and without issuing notice to other side so that the party concerned may not face inconvenience or monetary loss in approaching the High Court.
Judgment & Decree
Jawad Hassan, J.
The Appellants have filed this appeal under Order XLIII of C.P.C. against the impugned order dated 12.06.2025, passed by Civil Judge, Rawalpindi, whereby their application for grant of temporary injunction has been turned down.
2. At the outset, learned counsel submits that against the impugned order the Appellants have also filed an appeal before the Additional District Judge, Rawalpindi but subsequently, the same was withdrawn vide order dated 17.06.2025 due to lack of pecuniary jurisdiction. He further submits that the Appellants have a strong case for grant of interim injunction but the Civil Judge has turned down their request through the impugned order by not considering material aspects of the matter in true perspective. He prays for setting aside of the impugned order, being illegal and against the norms of justice.
3. Arguments heard and record perused.
4. Since short point is involved, notice to other side is dispensed with to avoid further delay and to promote the principle of speedy justice. Moreover, under the doctrine of limine control developed by this Court in Asif Saleem v. Chairman BOG University of Lahore and others (PLD 2019 Lahore 407) for early and expeditious disposal of a case, the Court can decide the matter at limine stage on the basis of material/documents available on the record/file and without issuing notice to other side so that the party concerned may not face inconvenience or monetary loss in approaching this Court.
5. Admittedly, the Appellants have filed a suit for declaration, recovery and permanent injunction along with an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of C.P.C. for grant of temporary injunction but the Civil Court has "turned down" their request for grant of an ad-interim relief through the impugned order dated 12.06.2025. Without discussing the reasons/grounds taken by the Civil Court for "turning down" the Appellants' request for grant of temporary injunction, significant to mention here is that the terminology "turned down" is not used in deciding an application Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of C.P.C. and the Civil Court should accept or dismiss it. If a quick glance is taken on the provisions contained in Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of C.P.C., it will elucidate that the Court may grant a temporary injunction to restrain a party from committing an act that could cause injury to the other party or damage to the subject matter of the suit on specific terms, such as duration, keeping an account or providing security. In the case of Shariq Builders and Property Advisors v. Dr. Muhammad Faisal Murad and others (2024 MLD 32), this Court has already discussed and elaborated these provisions of C.P.C.
6. In view of the above, since the impugned order suffers from a legal lacuna, it cannot be sustained and the same is hereby set-aside. The Appellants' application for grant of temporary injunction will be deemed to be pending before the Civil Court which will decide the same afresh strictly as per law. Disposed of. UN/F-12/L Order accordingly.