In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 1835 of 2009 Date of decision: April 01, 2009 Mohd. Sadique andn others .. Petitioners Vs. The Punjab State Electricity Board and others .. Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Mohd. Salim, Advocate for the petitioners. A.N. Jindal, J The plaintiff filed the suit for restraining the Punjab State Electricity Board (herein referred as 'the respondent') not to shift the electric transformer on their land. Both the courts below declined to grant the injunction. The learned Appellate Court in its order has observed that the petitioners have not shown having any residence in the suit land and they have also failed to show if any inconvenience is caused to them by shifting the transformer from plot of Nahar Singh to their land. Thus, the plaintiffs have no prima facie case. Learned counsel has also contended that the respondents in violation of the commercial circular No.07 of 2006 are shifting the electric transformer. Since both the courts below have declined the injunction and the order does not suffer from any jurisdictional error, as such, no interference in the impugned order is called for. In this regard, I rely upon the judgment delivered by the Apex Court in case Southern Sales & Services & others vs. Sauermilch Design & Handels GMBH, 2008 (4) RCR (Civil) 729 observed as under :- “16. As has been pointed out by Mr. Sharma, it is now well established as a principle of law that even if a wrong order is passed by a Court having jurisdiction to pass an order in such cases, the revisional Court will not interfere with such an order Civil Revision No. 1835 of 2009 -2- *** unless a jurisdictional error is pointed out and established by the person who questions such order.” Under the circumstances, the instant petition sans merit and is dismissed. April 01, 2009 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge