' The brief facts leading to this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal are that the appellants filed a suit against Karachi Municipal Corporation for declaration and injunction in the Court of the VIII Senior Civil Judge, Karachi, in respect of the right to collect blood of animals slaughtered at the Slaughter House at Landhi. On 8-8-1974, the Senior Civil Judge granted ad interim injunction as the Advocate for Karachi Municipal Corporation had no objection to the same. The order reads as follows:- "Heard the Advocates of the parties. The Advocate for the defendant has no objection to the grant of ad interim injunction. I, therefore, grant the ad interim injunction as prayed for till this application is finally decided."
2. The respondent No, 2 filed an application under Order I, rule 10, C. P. C. For being joined as a party to the suit on the ground that he is interested in the collection of the blood of animals slaughtered at the Slaughter house. However, it appears from the order of the Additional District Judge, Karachi, that no order on this application was passed, but he went up in revision before the learned Additional District Judge, Karachi. During the pendency of this revision, the Karachi Municipal Corporation made an application under Order XXXIX, rule 4, C. P. C. Praying that the ad interim injunction granted by the learned VIII Senior Civil Judge, Karachi, be discharged as it was operating against their interest. Accordingly, the learned Additional District Judge suspended the aforesaid order of the Civil Judge, Karachi.
3. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the learned Additional District Judge, Karachi, the appellants have come in this Miscellaneous Appeal before this Court.
4. I have heard Mr. G. M. Qureshi, the learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. Muhammad Nasir Khan, the learned counsel for the Karachi Municipal Corporation. Mr. Muhammad Nasir Khan has raised a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of this Miscellaneous Appeal. He contends that the appeal is not maintainable from an order passed in revision. The contention seems to be misconceived for the simple reason that the order has been passed on an application under Order XXXIX, rule 4, C. P. C. Moved by the Karachi Municipal Corporation, respondent No. 1 in revision, filed by respondent No, 2.
5. Order XLIII, rule 1, clause (r) provides an appeal from an order passed on an application under Order XXXIX, rule 4. It is not disputed br Mr. Nasir Khan that if the Additional District Judge had granted an injunction in a suit filed before him and had subsequently discharged or varied or set aside the same, an appeal to this Court was competent. Similarly, where in revision proceedings pending before him, he on an application under Order XXXIX, rule 4, C. P. C. Set aside or suspends an order for injunction though revision is not from an order of grant of injunction, an appeal, in my opinion, shall be competent from such an order under the aforesaid provisions. Therefore, I overrule the objection of Mr. Nasir Khan as to the maintainability of this appeal. Even otherwise, this Court would have set aside the order impugned in this appeal by exercising its revisional or inherent power under the Code of Civil Procedure, for the reasons appearing hereinafter.
6. In my opinion the application under Order XXXIX, rule 4 filed by the Karachi Municipal Corporation before the Additional District Judge was misconceived and ought not to have been entertained by him. Rule 4 of Order XXXIX of the Code of Civil Procedure provides as follows:- "Any order for an injunction may be discharged, or varied or set aside by the Court, on application made thereto by any party dissatisfied with such order."
' From the above provision, it is clear that an order for injunction could be discharged or varied or set aside by the Court which passed it and not B by the revisional or the appellate Court unless a revision or an appeal was preferred from such an order. In this case the ad interim order was passed by consent of the Karachi Municipal Corporation and there was no question of feeling aggrieved by such an order. It is stated at the bar by Mr. Muhammad Nasir Khan and confirmed by Mr. Qureshi that applications for vacating the ad interim order are still pending before the senior Civil Judge, and one of such application has been filed by the Karachi Municipal Corporation. The learned Additional District Judge, therefore, was not justified in suspending the ad interim order granting injunction when the same was not impugned in the revision before him.
7. For the aforesaid reasons, I set aside the order passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Karachi, whereby he suspended the order of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Karachi. However it will be open to the parties to press the applications filed by them for vacation of ad interim injunction and pending before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Karachi.
8. A grievance has been made by Mr. Muhammad Nasir Khan that the trial Court does not find enough time to dispose of the application filed by the Karachi Municipal Corporation and he requests that a direction be given to him for early decision of the applications as the collections of revenue are being affected by the delay. I think the request is reasonable and Mr. Qureshi has no objection if such a direction is given. I, therefore, direct that the learned Senior Civil Judge shall dispose of the applications under Order XXXIX, rule 4 as well as under Order XXXIX, rules 1 and 2, pending before him within one month from the date of the communication of this order. The records be sent back to the respective Courts.
' There shall be no order as to costs as Mr. Qureshi does not claim the same.