( 1 ) WRIT Application (W. P. (C) No. 5342 of 2005) is directed against the order dated 15-4-2005 passed by the learned Civil judge (Senior Division), Jagatsinghpur in c. M. A. No. 62 of 2005 directing the petitioner to supply soft drinks against the advances received from the opposite party. ( 2 ) BEFORE examining the legality of the impugned order I feel it necessary to refer to the background of the case. The opposite party has filed Civil Suit No. 83 of 2004 in the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Senior division), Jagatsinghpur praying for a decree declaring that the agency/distributorship of the plaintiff with the defendant No. 1-company subsists for the district of jagatsinghpur and for a decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendant no. 1 from terminating distributorship of the plaintiff for Jagatsinghpur district and restraining the defendant No. 1 from appointing any new dealers for Jagatsinghpur district. The plaintiff-opposite party also prayed for decree for mandatory injunction directing the defendant No. 1-petitioner to supply goods and materials as per the indent in normal course without discontinuance. Case of the plaintiff-opposite party is that originally mamata Drinks and Industries Limited was the manufacturer of the soft drinks namely Coca-Cola, Thumps Up, Sprint, maaza etc. for the State of Orissa and the plaintiff was a distributor under the said company appointed for the district of jagatsinghpur. The business transaction with the said Mamata Drinks and Industries limited was going on smoothly. The defendant-petitioner purchased the aforesaid Industry with all its assets and liabilities and it was decided that arrangement with regard to distribution and sale of soft drinks shall continue as before. On the basis of such understanding the plaintiff-opposite party was being supplied with soft drinks by the defendant No. 1 for distribution in the jagatsinghpur District. Further case of the plaintiff-opposite party is that in course of business the defendant-petitioner withheld some legitimate claim of the plaintiff-opposite (party) even though there was no due from the side of the plaintiff-opposite party and dispute arose from that stage. It is also case of the plaintiff-opposite party that in view of such dispute the defendant-petitioner stopped supply of soft drinks to the plaintiff-opposite party, as a result of which the plaintiff-opposite party was forced to file the suit for the relief claimed. It is also case of the plaintiff-opposite party that in view of such dispute the defendant-petitioner stopped supply of soft drinks to the plaintiff-opposite party, as a result of which the plaintiff-opposite party was forced to file the suit for the relief claimed. In the said suit the plaintiff-opposite party also filed an application for grant of temporary injunction restraining the petitioner and its authorized agent from terminating the distributorship of the plaintiff-opposite party for jagatsinghpur district and also for a direction not to appoint any new distributor in the area and also for a direction to supply soft drinks and other materials. An objection was filed to the said petition by the petitioner in which a specific stand was taken that there is no relationship of master and servant between the plaintiff and the defendants and there is no agreement or contract between the parties. It is also stand of the defendant-petitioner that the plaintiff-opposite party had not been appointed as distributor and as a matter of fact there is no such system of appointing distributors. According to the defendant-petitioner the plaintiff-opposite party is liable to pay huge amount of money to the defendant-petitioner and so long as outstanding dues are not cleared the defendant-petitioner cannot be forced to supply soft drinks and other materials such as crates. Upon hearing of the said petition vide C. M. A. No. 107 of 2004 the learned Civil Judge by order dated 15-5-2004 directed as follows :"so far as the benefit of the consumers of soft drinks in and around Jagatsinghpur, during this scorching summer, the O. P. shall resume supply and the petitioner shall make advance payment. The disputed amount if amicably settled between parties, this Court welcomes it. If not, it will be decided in the main suit. This is a very simple matter and it appears that the petitioner as well as the o. P. have made a mountain out of mole hill. Missinformation/misunderstanding should not be converted into Court battle. For the aforesaid observation, with direction both the parties, to petitioner to pay outstanding and the O. P. to continue supply soft drinks. It is hereby ordered as follows : order both the parties are directed to maintain status quo Anti in respect of the suit property till disposal of the CS 83 of 2004. xxx"this order was not challenged by either party in appeal. It is hereby ordered as follows : order both the parties are directed to maintain status quo Anti in respect of the suit property till disposal of the CS 83 of 2004. xxx"this order was not challenged by either party in appeal. Case of the plaintiff-opposite party is that after the aforesaid order was passed the plaintiff sent an amount of rs. 20,000/- by way of demand draft along with 215 crates with empty bottles on 19-5-2004 to the defendant-petitioner. In spite of the receipt of the amount as well as crates and bottles the defendant-petitioner did not supply soft drinks pursuant to order of the civil Court in the aforesaid CMA No. 107 of 2004. Therefore, the plaintiff-opposite party again filed an application under Section 151 of C. P. C. which was registered as C. M. A. No. 62 of 2005 and on hearing of the parties of the said petition, the impugned order has been passed. ( 3 ) SRI Rath, learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted that in the order dated 15-5-2004 the Court had issued clear direction to the opposite party to pay outstanding dues and only on that condition the petitioner was to continue to supply soft drinks. In view of the aforesaid direction there was no necessity on the part of the petitioner to challenge the said direction. It was further stated that the opposite party having not cleared outstanding dues the amount of Rs. 20,000/- sent by him was adjusted against the outstanding dues. Learned counsel for the opposite party, on the other hand, submitted that payment of outstanding dues being not a condition to supply soft drinks, the petitioner has to supply soft drinks against the advance payment. ( 4 ) THE order dated 15-5-2005 clearly stipulates that the opposite party shall have to pay outstanding dues and the petitioner shall supply soft drinks. Though it may not appear to be conditional, but at the same time the opposite party having not paid anything towards outstanding dues and having not complied with part of the direction of the Civil Court the petitioner was also under no obligation to continue supply of soft drinks. In the impugned order, learned Civil judge has tried not only to explain the earlier order dated 15-5-2004 but also has issued direction which runs contrary to the directions contained in the order dated 15-5-2004. In the impugned order, learned Civil judge has tried not only to explain the earlier order dated 15-5-2004 but also has issued direction which runs contrary to the directions contained in the order dated 15-5-2004. I am, therefore, of the view that the impugned order having been passed in an application under Section 151. C. P. C. , there was no occasion for the trial Court to add anything to the order dated 15-5-2005. Apart from the above, no such order could have been passed solely on the ground that in Summer public would like to consume soft drinks and therefore soft drinks should be supplied even if outstanding dues are not cleared. I am unable to conceive such a ground for passing an order of mandatory injunction. I, accordingly, quash the impugned order dated 15-4-2005 and W. P. (C)No. 5342 of 2005 stands allowed. ( 5 ) IN view of the above order passed in w. P. (C) No. 5342 of 2005, W. P. (C) No. 5489 of 2005 has become infructuous and the same is dismissed as infructuous. Petition allowed. .