MUHAMMAD SAJID MEHMOOD SETH, J.--- Through this petition, Order dated 03.06.2015 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Sahiwal has been impugned with the following prayer:- "This writ petition may very kindly be accepted and the order passed by learned Additional District Judge, Sahiwal dated 03.06.2015 may be amended that the proceeding of learned trial court be suspended. Special instructions may very kindly be given to Additional District Judge, Sahiwal to pass proper order on stay application and suspend the proceedings of learned Civil Judge, Sahiwal dated 10.03.2015 instead of passing the order that the trial court is directed not to announce final judgment till the decision of the case, which is in the interest of justice, equity and fairplay."
2. Brief facts are that respondent No,2 filed an application under Order VI, Rule 17, C.P.C. Seeking leave to amend the plaint, the learned Civil Judge allowed the amendment petition of respondent No,2 on 10.03.2015. Aggrieved by the aforesaid Order passed by the learned Civil Judge, Sahiwal, the petitioner filed revision before the learned Additional District Judge, Sahiwal who vide Order dated 03.06.2015 granted the stay order in favour of the petitioner to the extent that "trial court is directed not to announce final judgment till the next date of hearing."
3. Through this petition, petitioner has challenged the aforesaid Order passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Lahore with the prayer that scope of stay order granted by learned Additional .District Judge dated 10.06.2015 in favour of the petitioner, may be widened so as to include the relief of suspension of Order of amendment allowed by the learned trial court.
4. Since the petitioner has challenged the interim/interlocutory order through this writ petition, no writ lies against an interim/ interlocutory Order passed by a Court of competent jurisdiction unless it is shown to be patently illegal, unlawful and without lawful authority. Especially when the appeal filed by the petitioner is still pending before the learned appellate Court and it is yet to be decided by the said Court. Reliance can be made to the following judgments:-
5. Abdul Rasheed v. Judge, Family Courts, Mian Channu and another (2010 CLC 797 Agricultural Development Bank of Pakistan and others v. Yar Muhammad and others (2004 CLD 1084)
Muhammad Yaqoob v. Secretary Cooperative and 6 others (2003 YLR 2604) iv. Ejaz Mahmood v. Mst. Humaira and another (1983 CLC 3305)
6. In the case of Muhammad Yaqoob supra, this Court while giving its findings on the question of maintainability of writ against the interlocutory order, recorded the following observations in Para 10, which are as follows:- "10. Since the appeal has been filed before the Appellate Authority under section 64 of the Cooperative Societies Act, 1925 which has not been finally disposed of, the matter is sub judice before the Appellate Authority and the petitioner through these two writ petitions has challenged the interlocutory order of the Appellate Authority during pendency of the appeal, therefore, the writ against the impugned order being not maintainable is liable to be dismissed. Reliance can be placed on the cases of "Managing Committee, Revenue Employees, Cooperative Housing Society, Rawalpindi through Secretary v. Secretary, Cooperative Societies, Government of Punjab, Lahore and 3 others" 2001 CLC 838 Lahore, M.A. Faiz Baluch v. The Chief Commissioner (The Appellate Court), Islamabad Capital Territory, Islamabad and 4 others 1998 CLC 687 (Lahore) and "The Engineers Cooperative Housing Society Limited v. The Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Punjab and another 1992 CLC 547 Lahore."
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to point out any illegality, infirmity, jurisdictional error in the impugned Order.
7. This writ petition is not competent and thus, the same is hereby dismissed in limine.