Honble SHARMA, J. – This revision petition is directed against the order dated 16.5.1996 passed by the Additional District Judge, Ajmer, whereby the order dated 21.9.1996 passed by the Civil Judge ( Junior Division) Ajmer has been quashed. (2) The facts of the case are that the plaintiff-petitioner submitted an appli- cation under Order 35 Rules 1 and 2 CPC before the trial Court seeking temporary injunction praying there in that the defendant- petitioner is restrained from recovering development tax/road tax or any tax on mineral on loading of Bajari. (3) The trial court vide order dated 21.9.1995 allowed the application and issued under temporary injunction against the defendant non- petitioner. On an appeal preferred under the provisions of Order 43 Rule 1 CPC, the Additional District Judge, Ajmer vide judgment dated 16.5.1996 set aside the order passed by the trial court on the ground that though the petitioner has proved prima facie case in his favour yet the balance of convenience and point pertaining to irreparable loss were not in his favour and relying on the judgment of Municipal Board Bundi V. RIICO (1), the order passed by the trial court was set-aside. (4) I have heard Shri B.B.L. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner an Shri Resham Bhargava, learned counsel for the non--petitioner. Mr. B.B.L. Sharma learned counsel has rgued that the lower appellate Court has committed illegality in reversing the order passed by the trial court. On the other hand Shri Resham Bhargava, learned counsel has supported the judgment of the appellate court. Mr. Bhargava has placed reliance on the judgment of Municipal Corporation, Rajkot Vs. Bhupat Lal Dharshibhai Pareekh and ors(2),in which it has been observed that while granting interim injunction hardship likely to be caused to both sides should be taken into account an normally and interim injunction restraining the State or a local authority from collecting taxes should not be granted as that would cause great hardship and recovery of taxes in case the suit is dismissed would be impossible. (5) I see no reason to interfere in the order passed by the lower appellate court and in my opinion the lower appellate court has not, committed any illegality in exercise of jurisdiction vested in it. Consequently, I dismiss this revision petition without any order as to costs.