1. ' MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.--Application of petitioner for issuance of temporary injunction during pendency of the suit, with the averments that he was the owner of the property in dispute having been gifted to her grandmother in the year 1939 by the Amir of Bahawalpur, to protect his possession, was dismissed by the trial Court through order, dated 19-3-1996, which was maintained, in appeal by First Appellate Court i.e, Additional District Judge, Rahimyar Khan by order, dated 18-11-1999 by which appeal filed by petitioner was also dismissed. Revision Petition No,427 Of 1999-BWP filed by petitioner against these two orders has also been dismissed by learned Judge in Chamber of Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench through the impugned judgment against- which leave to appeal has been sought.
2. ' In the original plaint, no case of gift from Amir of Bahawalpur was made out. It was after a period of about 1-1/2 years after the respondents had raised pleas that they were the owners of the property and the petitioner was inducted as tenant in the same who had been paying rent to the respondents, that he made application for amendment of the plaint to incorporate the plea of gift in it which was, however, allowed.
3. ' Learned Judge in Chamber of the High Court has observed that from the record, it was revealed that the land remained in possession of Highway and different departments of the Government.
4. The respondents also raised the plea that they had already got the land vacated from the petitioner who had been dispossessed. Learned Judge also observed that though the gift was alleged to have been ,made in the year 1939 but no entry whatsoever had been got effected in the revenue record. The bald statement of the petitioner as to gift of land, etc. Was in these circumstances not considered as sufficient to, hold that he had prima facie arguable case and, that balance of convenience was also in his favour which findings do not suffer from any illegality.
5. We find that the orders passed by the Courts below are perfectly in accordance with law laid down by the superior Courts in relation to matters regarding issuance of temporary injunctions in the exercise of discretionary jurisdiction.
6. ' For the foregoing reasons, this petition is dismissed and leave to appeal refused. Needless to point out that nothing said about the merits of the case in the impugned orders or this judgment shall be taken as findings recorded by the Courts on merits of the case. The suit shall be decided on its own merits uninfluenced by these observations which are tentative in nature made merely to find out whether petitioner had a prima facie arguable case for the purpose of issuance of temporary injunction.