' This C. M. Has been moved for being impleaded as a party in the Civil Revision on the ground that a contract was given to the applicant by the respondent-Town Committee, Ghakhar, for holding Cattle fair from 1st January, 1983 to 31st December, 1983 ; that in a suit brought by the applican the had already been allowed a temporary injunction ; and that conversely The status quo ante issued by this Court in favour of the revision petitioner had adversely affected the rights of the applicant particulary under the temporary injunction allowed to him by the trial Court and confirmed by the learned District Judge. Additionally, it was urged that the resolution upon which the revision petitioner based his contract to hold the same market had been quashed with effect from 30th January, 1981, and that he was not entitled to the order of status quo ante.
2. The C. M. Was opposed by the revision petitioner maintaining primarily that the very agreement executed by the respondent-Town Committee in favour of the applicant had expired by efflux of time, and that by virtue of the rule laid down in Muhammad Yaqub v. The Health Officer, Municipal Committee, Hyderabad and another (1) he had no interest under the contract to be impleaded either a party or granted any injunction.
3. There is no gainsaying the fact that the agreement upon which the applicant based his claim nothing was left for 31st December, 1983 and thus by efflux of time nothing was left for him. He could not be allowed to continue to avail the cattle fair only because he was able to get a temporary injunction from the trial Court in his own suit, the more so when the present revision petitioner was not a party to the same. The rule laid down in the aforesaid authority is quite clear. No relief could be given to a party after the lapse of the contract made in his favour. This is how the applicant is not a necessary party to the present revision petition. The C. M. Is dismissed.