Judgment 1. The order dismissing the revision for default on 28 November 2003 is recalled. 2. The revision is restored to its original number. 3. The petitioners have filed the revision. The petitioner no.1 submits in person. 4. The issues between the petitioners and the contesting respondents are personal between them regarding a property over which both sides are at loggerheads. A status quo order had been passed. The trial court has recorded that the order of the court imposing status quo was violated, thus, cost of Rs. 150 was ordered on the defendants, which if not paid also rendered them liable to civil prison. The pendency of this revision is obstructing with the proceedings of the suit. Already, it is contended by the petitioner submitting in person that against an exparte decree, he has filed a miscellaneous appeal. On the miscellaneous appeal, this court cannot make any comment because that record is before another division of the court. 5. Fathers of the plaintiffs and the defendants were brothers. They ought to be resolving their disputes between them failing which they must join the proceeding in court. But unfortunately things have come down to this that while they are first cousins, the litigation between them has also seen controversy of violation of an injunction.. 6. While the court can only interfere to the extent that the petitioners as defendants may not see prison, but this does not mean that they will not pay costs. 7. The costs shall be paid by the petitioners within one month from today as ordered by the court. 8. Dismissed. 9. A copy of this order be sent by the Registrar General to the trial Court.