JUDGMENT

Cornelius, J. - This proceeding lying in the jurisdiction of this Court to punish contempts of its own orders has come before this Full Bench in the following circumstances. An election petition was proceeding before the Election Petitions Commission at Lahore which had been instituted by one Mian Nur Hussain against the returned candidate Mian Sultan Ali Nanghiana, M.L.A. from the Shahpur Muhammadan Constituency. The recording of evidence bad been closed and the case had been fixed for hearing arguments when Mian Sultan Ali Nanghiana instituted a suit in the Court of Mr. Muhammad Saleem Subordinate Judge, 1st class, for certain declarations. He complained that the Election Petitions Commission (hereinafter referred to as " the Commission) had unjustly refused to him his inherent right to appear in evidence as his own witness, as well as his right to examine on commission a witness, namely, Chaudhri Ram Singh Senior Superintendent of Police, who was now in the Indian Dominion, by the issue of a commission. At the same time, the plaintiff sought an injunction against the defendant, Mian Nur Hussain to prevent him from proceeding further with the case before the commission till the decision of the suit, and the learned Subordinate Judge issued an interim injunction to the defendant to this effect and then lisped notice, in relation to the prayer for an inculcation, in response to which the defendant appeared and showed cause. On 29th September 1948, the learned Sub-Judge dismissed the application for an injunction with costs. The grounds for dismissal will be stated in greater detail presently. The plaintiff Mian Sultan Ali Nanghiana immediately filed a petition in this Court on the revision side. The grounds of the petition were as follows: It was repeated that Mian Sultan Ali had an inherent right to give evidence on his own behalf and to have Ch. Ram Singh examined on commission, and it was averred that the order made by the Commission in its discretion refusing to adjourn the case for these purposes had been made illegally and wrongly, in consequence of which the petitioner stood to suffer substantial injury. It was also stated that the learned Subordinate Judge having held that the plaintiff had a' cause of action and that there was jurisdiction to hear and decide the plaintiff's suit, had "erred in law in not confirming the order of stay of proceedings before the Election Petitions Commission". Accordingly, it was prayed that the order 6? the learned Subordinate Judge should be reversed and at the same time an interim stay order should be issued to the respondent Mian Nur Hussain not to proceed with the case before the commission. In a separate application invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 151, Civil P.C., the petitioner stated that the commission was taking up the case on the following day and had fixed a further date two days later for dealing with the case, and "if the proceedings are completed there and a report submitted to His Excellency the Governor, the case filed in the lower Court will become infruotuous and the petitioner will suffer substantial loss which would be irremediable." It was also stated that the order of the Commission dated 11th August 1948 closing the case of the petitioner was arbitrary and that the interests of justice required that the petitioner should have full facility for adducing evidence as allowed to him by law. On a consideration of all the circumstances bearing upon the question in issue, I made the following order:

Let the record be sent for, for a very early date. In the meantime, further proceedings before the Commission are stayed temporary injunction to issue.

The "temporary injunction" was intended for the respondent, as prayed by the petitioner, but so far as I can make out none was issued, although that is not material. The order restraining further proceedings before the Commission was perfectly clear and in compliance therewith, on the same date, viz.