' NOOR-UL-HAQ N. QURESHI, J. --- The facts forming background of this civil revision are that the petitioner has filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction, which is pending adjudication in Civil Court concerned. Alongwith suit the petitioner filed application for grant of temporary injunction under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 r/w Section 151, C.P.C. Vide order dated 18.02.2014 learned Civil Judge, 1st Class, Islamabad after hearing the parties dismissed the application. Feeling aggrieved the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned District & Sessions Judge (West), Islamabad, which was entrusted to the learned Additional District Judge-VIII, East-Islamabad, who vide order dated 20.10.2014 dismissed the same, hence the instant Civil Revision challenging the impugned orders passed by the learned Civil Judge, 1st Class and Additional District Judge respectively.
2. In support of civil revision, learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that both the orders of Courts below are nullity in the eye of law as the same are result of misreading and non-reading of record. That all the three ingredients regarding grant of temporary injunction were fully available to the petitioner, but despite this application for temporary injunction was dismissed by the learned Trial Court. The impugned orders have been passed by the Courts below in a haste manner without giving any weight to the arguments and the documents produced by the petitioner before the Trial Court, hence the same are liable to be set aside.
3. I have heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.
4. The claim set forth by the petitioner in the plaint has yet to be established by producing evidence. There are concurrent findings of the Courts below. Learned Additional District Judge, Islamabad rightly came to the conclusion that the respondents are exclusive owners of the land and there was no agreement between the parties. Both the Courts below on having weighed and considered all relevant facts and circumstances of the case passed, rational, judicious and equitable orders.
5. Moreover, all the three ingredients for grant of injunction i,e, balance of convenience, prima facie arguable case and irreparable loss did not co-exist in favour of the petitioner, therefore, the application for the grant of injunction and appeal were rightly dismissed.
6. For what has been discussed above, the instant civil revision being devoid of merits is dismissed in limine.