Mithan Lal, J. - (1.) In this civil revision the point for consideration is whether the court, after the dismissal of the suit and the appeal, could pass an order for attachment of defendant's properties due to disobedience of an order of injunction.
(2.) The plaintiff brought a suit in 1953 for possession and demolition of certain constructions and an injunction was issued on 2-6-1953 restraining the defendants from making further constructions. This order was later on modified on 4th June, 1953 inasmuch as it was further limited by ordering that the defendants could complete the temple and the Parikrama but they could not make other constructions. On 28-9-1954 an application was made by the plaintiff that the defendants had disobeyed the injunction inasmuch as they had constructed a kotha and the parikrama. This application remained pending and orders thereon were passed on 4th Jan. 1957. During this time the suit was dismissed on 3-11-1954 and the appeal filed against that judgment was also dismissed on 20-11-1956.
(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that under Or. 39, R. 2-A (1) the court can only pass an order "while the suit is proceeding" and once the suit has been decided, and the appeal has also been decided the court becomes functus officio and could not pass any order. This contention of the learned counsel has a good deal of force.;