IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (MS) No. 919 OF 2003 Kumud Ranjan Sarkar ……Petitioner. Versus Nitai and others. ….Respondents. Present : Mr. M.C. Pande, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.C. Belwal, Advocate for respondent no. 2. Date of Decision : 27.9.2010 Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. Heard Mr. M.C. Pande, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. J.C. Belwal, Advocate for the respondent no. 2. 2. Mr. M.C. Pande, learned counsel for the petitioner has made a statement that this writ petition arises out of an application of temporary injunction in a pending suit and since now the suit itself has been decided, the present writ petition (which arises out of an order passed in a temporary injunction application) has lost its meaning. 3. In view of the above statement, the instant writ petition is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. 4. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 27.9.2010 Rathour