Subordinate courts lack jurisdiction and must adhere to statutory provisions when issuing injunctions.

1. In exercise of the powers vested in the High Court under S.115 of the CPC, the records of Civil Suit No. 639 / Numbri entitled Manzoor Ahmad Dar v. State of J. and K. pending disposal in the Court of IInd Addl. Munsiff, Srinagar was called to examine the correctness or otherwise of the temporary injunction issued by the trial Court, out of which Civil Reference No. 6/87 arises.

2. Similarly record of Civil Suit No. 24 / Numbri titled M/s. Alson Motors v. State of J. and K. and are pending in the Court of Municipal Magistrate, Ist. Class, Ist Civil Subordinate Judge, Srinagar was called for the purposes of examining the legality of the temporary injunction issued, out of which Civil Reference No. 7/87 arises.

3. While admitting the aforesaid petitions, this Court stayed the operation of the orders impugned during the pendency of the petitions and directed the Dy. Registrar to submit the record to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice for initiating disciplinary proceedings against Presiding Officer, if deemed proper. The Presiding Officer of the Court of IInd Addl. Munsiff, Srinagar was further asked to submit an explanation about the circumstances under which the temporary injunction was passed.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record of the trial Courts.

5. In Civil Reference No. 6/87 the Presiding Officer directed that the operation of notice No. 363 / STG dt. 22-7-1986 issued by the Assistant Collector. Sales Tax Circle (G) Srinagar whereby the plaintiff was directed to deposit Rs. 60,634.77, shall remain stayed. The order was passed on 28th July, 1986 when the plaint was filed in that Court. The record of the Court below shows that the Presiding Officer passed the following order on 28th July, 1986 :
"Issue notice to the otherside and put up on 29-7-1986."
At the reverse of this application, the Presiding Officer passed the impugned order on the same date and observed that the non - applicant was absent despite service. A perusal of the record shows that the office of the Excise and Taxation Officer, Sales Tax had received the notice from IInd Addl. Munsiff Srinagar, on 29-7-1986. Apparently there is nothing on the record to show that any notice was issued to the respondent before the passing of the order impugned. The Presiding Officer wrongly mentioned in the order impugned that the non - applicant was absent despite service. It is also note - worthy that suit was filed against the State of Jammu and Kashmir through Assistant Collector, Circle (G) Srinagar and not through the concerned Secretary of the Ministry. The Assistant Collector Circle (G) Srinagar was never impleaded a party as such in the suit. The manner in which the order is passed and the haste shown by the Presiding Officer reflects that the order was not passed in accordance with the provisions of law but under some other pressures or the influences. Keeping in view the peculiar nature of the circumstances, I had asked for the explanation of the Presiding Officer vide my order dt. 28th April, 1987 but till the date of hearing of the case when the judgement was reserved on 22nd July, 1987 no explanation had been submitted. There is a letter of the Presiding Officer on the record dt. 21st May, 1987 requesting for some more time to submit the explanation after perusing the file. Non - submission of the explanation without any further delay has deprived me of knowing the circumstances under which the order impugned was passed on 28-7-1986 when the notice was issued for 29-7-1986 and served on the same date. The conduct of the Presiding Officer is not free from doubt who is also guilty of insubordination and showing disrespect to the hi