1991 PLP 1485 (SCMR)

ABDUL HAFEEZ MEMON, J.‑‑This petition for leave to appeal is filed against the judgment, dated 11‑4‑1990 passed by the learned High Court of Balochistan dismissing the revision filed by the petitioners against the judgment, dated 26‑12‑1989 passed by the learned Additional District Judge‑11, Quetta, upholding the order, dated 4‑11‑1989 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Quetta refusing to grant temporary injunction in the suit filed by the petitioners against the respondents. Briefly stated, the facts are that the petitioners who are owners of the tea shops and restaurants were granted commercial licences by the Television Corporation for operating T.Vs. and V.C.Rs. in their tea shops and restaurants, and according to the petitioners they had been showing only Pakistani films and P.T.V. dramas on their T.Vs. and V.C.Rs. As, however, the law enforcing Agencies/Police are said to have found the petitioners operating their T.Vs. and V.C.Rs. in violation of the law, they raided their shops and restaurants and seized the said appartus. The petitioners thereupon filed a petition in the High Court of Balochistan which was dismissed by the said High Court against which the petitioners filed petition for leave to appeal No.84‑R of 1988 in this Court, which was disposed of with the following remarks:‑‑ "In the light of the foregoing discussion excepting the point made by the learned counsel, underlined in para. No.5 (supra) which is irresistible and in fact has not been resisted by any of the learned counsel appearing for the respondents' side, this petition fails; and with these remarks is disposed of accordingly". The contention of the learned counsel underlined in paragraph 5 of the order and referred to hereinabove in the remarks by this Court are reproduced as under:‑‑ "Accordingly the learned counsel urged that the police should refrain from interfering with the petitioner's business in any manner except in accordance with law. And further that if an illegal action is taken against the petitioners they should be at liberty to proceed against the persons concerned": Subsequently the Investigating Agency/Police is alleged to have however again raided the tea shops and restaurants of the petitioners who thereupon filed suit for the declaration and injunction before the learned Civil Judge, Quetta and in the suit also filed an application for grant of temporary injunction under Order 39, rules 1 & 2 of C.P.C The learned Civil Judge however declined to grant temporary injunction and appeal filed against his order was also dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Quetta. The petitioners thereafter filed revision petition in the High Court against the order passed by the learned Additional District, Judge which was also dismissed on 11‑4‑1990. Hence this petition for leave to appeal. After the case was "argued at some length, the learned Assistant Advocate‑General appearing for the State made a statement that the respondents had neither ordered closure of petitioners' shops or restaurants nor they intend to do so and that they also do not intend to seize T.V. or V.C.R. in their premises unless the petitioners operate the same in breach of the relevant law in which case the owners of the tea shops and restaurants will be proceeded against in accordance with law. After making of the statement by the learned A.A.G. as above, the learned counsel for the petitioners felt assured and did not press this petition which is dismissed accordingly. H.B.T./G‑309/S ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????? Petition dismissed.