1. ' This appeal has been filed against an order passed by learned Single Judge whereby the application moved under Order 11, Rule 21 was dismissed. The contention of the learned counsel for the Appellant is that an application under Order 11, Rule 12 was moved by the plaintiff and that the defendant had violated the order of the Court inasmuch as no affidavit in reply/compliance of the orders of the Court was produced and, thus, discovery of the documents was not made. We have heard the learned counsel for the Appellant as well as Mr. Zubair Qureshi, learned counsel for the respondent on pre-admission notice. We called upon the learned counsel for the appellant to show us as to which order of the Court passed on the application under Order 11, Rule 12 was not complied with by the defendant. The learned counsel for the appellant has failed to show us any such order passed by the Court. Learned counsel for the respondent relied on the case of M/s. United Bank Ltd. v. Yousuf Haji Noor Muhammad Dhadhi reported in 1988 SCMR page 82 wherein it has been laid down by their Lordships of Supreme Court that unless there is an order passed by the Court, it cannot be said that there is violation of that. Under such circumstances, Order 11, Rule 21 could not be invoked. Clearly, the provisions of Order 11, rule 21 are in the shape of penalty, and such provisions have to be applied strictly. The learned counsel for the appellant stated that only an application under Order 11, Rule 12 was moved. We do not think that was enough for invoking the provisions of Order 11, Rule 21, C.P.C. We have also considered and gone through the contents of the impugned order of the learned Single Judge, we do not find any forceful reason to take an exceptions with the said order.
2. ' Finding no force in the appeal, we do not find it necessary to be admitted to regular hearing.
3. Therefore, we dismiss this appeal in limine.