WAHEED KHAN versus ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY FATA
Sections 42 and 54 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), OLXX, RR1 and 2 Suit for Permanent Decree of Decree and Temporary Order of Prohibition, Application for Trial Court Allowed, but the appellate court rejected the application temporarily issuing the injunction, all three of these traditional components must be met by the plaintiff even if one of the components was found to be lost. The order could not be issued in favor of the plaintiff, in the present case the plaintiff demanded that the authorities be forced to withdraw. A clause in the tender notice to enable the claimant to participate in the tender process so that the issuance of such a directory order would be equivalent to passing an order in favor of the claimant in the pre-trial stage, in any clause of the claimant's stand. Is not supported. The law, he failed to make the first case in his favor if the plaintiff did not participate in the tender process, the maximum would be the loss of recovery in the case of money, which cannot be considered irreparable harm. The balance was also not in favor of the plaintiff. As the bidding process stops, public development works will be shut down and the national ex-checker will suffer due to the daily trend of rising prices for construction materials, and people in the area will also lose this facility. ? The balance of facilities, in these circumstances, did not speak in favor of the plaintiff and instead the plaintiff facing temporary instability did not temporarily fail to sue for the issuance of the order, the appellate court ruled.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2011
