1 9 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2084/2005. M/s. Sharma Internatinal Vs. G.M., Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Churu & Ors. Date of Order :: 7th November 2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI Mr. Narendra Thanvi for Mr. R.K. Thanvi, for the petitioner. Mr. Vijay Bishnoi, for the respondents. ..... BY THE COURT: This writ petition has been preferred against the order dated 08.02.2005 as passed by the District Judge, Churu in Civil Appeal (Order) No.37/2004 vacating the temporary injunction granted by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Churu on 05.06.2004 in Civil Misc. Case No. 33/2004. By way of temporary injunction, the learned Trial Court restrained the defendants-respondents that they should not terminate the dealership agreement of the plaintiff-petitioner before its terms and should not adjust the due amount of certain customers from the bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner. The learned Appellate Court, however, found that no case for grant of temporary injunction was made out looking to the contractual relationship between the parties; and the learned Appellate Court was also of opinion that the aspect of irreparable injury was not in favour of the plaintiff-petitioner. 2 In this writ petition filed way back in the year 2005, show cause notices were ordered to be issued on 11.04.2005 without any interim order in favour of the petitioner. On the matter being listed on 16.10.2008 in default category for the respondent No.3 having not been served, after noticing the fact situation of the case, learned counsel for the parties were posed the question about the present status of the original civil suit wherein the said temporary injunction application was filed whereupon learned counsel prayed for some time; and while dispensing with service on the respondent No.3 for the present purpose, the matter was ordered to be listed for admission today. Today, learned counsel for the parties expressed their inability to state the present status of the related original civil suit and, therefore, the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) was directed obtain the requisite information telephonically. The learned Deputy Registrar (Judicial) has pointed out as per telephonic conversation that the concerning civil suit bearing No. 50/2004 was dismissed by the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Churu on 28.07.2006 on an application moved under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure; meaning thereby that the plaint stood rejected and, obviously, any aspect related with grant of interim relief in the said suit has been rendered redundant. 3 Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has not been able to receive the requisite information and instructions from the petitioner but could not dispute the position that if the suit is not surviving presently, that is no justification to proceed with this writ petition in relation to the orders passed on the prayer for interim relief therein. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and particularly for the information having been received about the said original civil suit being not pending, this writ petition is treated as infructuous; and is dismissed as such. It goes without saying that the writ petition having been dismissed as infructuous, this order shall not, otherwise, be of any prejudice to the petitioner in relation to his rights, if any. (DINESH MAHESHWARI), J. Mohan/