NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.--The petitioners had moved the Civil Court for making an award given by an Arbitrator where under they were held entitled to the suit land subject to payment of Rs.2,50,000 as a rule of the Court. The respondents who claim to be purchasers of the suit land had raised objections to the said award and the matter is pending in a Civil Court. Meanwhile, the respondents instituted a suit against the petitioners in the Revenue Court for the recovery of rent and for their ejectment. The petitioners submitted an application before the Civil Court seized with the matter of the award for grant of temporary injunction to restrain the respondents from interfering in any manner with their possession over the disputed land. This prayer was refused and the petitioners preferred an appeal before the Additional District Judge, who also dismissed the same vide order, dated 18-2-1982. The petitioners then preferred a revision petition before the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan. A learned Judge of the said Court in a well-considered order rejected the revision petition holding, inter alia, that competently instituted proceedings before the revenue Court cannot be frustrated by the issuance of restraining order. Hence this petition for leave to appeal.
2. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
3. The orders of the Courts below do not require any interference not only for the reasons set out by them in their orders but also for the additional reason that an injunction cannot be granted by a Court to stay proceedings of another Court which is not subordinate to the Court from which injunction is sought. As the revenue Court is not subordinate to the Civil Court in the relevant regard, hence no injunction can be granted to stay its proceedings.
4. This petition fails and is dismissed hereby.