Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J. 1. By the impugned order dated 8th September, 2016 the plaintiff's prayer for extension of ad-interim order of injunction was not allowed by the learned District Judge at Barasat, as the plaintiff failed to comply with the provision contained in Order 39 Rule 3(a)(b) of the Civil Procedure Code. The instant appeal is filed by the plaintiff/appellant challenging the legality of the said order. 2. In view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of A. Venkatasubbiah Naidu -vs- S. Chellappan & Ors., reported in 2000(7) SCC 695 ; we do not find any apparent illegality in the order impugned as the plaintiff has failed to comply with the provision under Order 39 Rule 3(a)(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure after obtaining an ad-interim order of injunction. 3. Hence, we decline to admit the appeal. The appeal, thus, stands dismissed. 4. Consequently, the application filed in connection with this appeal is also dismissed. 5. It is, however, made clear that while dismissing the appeal, we have not entered into the merit of the application for temporary injunction. 6. As such, the learned Trial Judge is absolutely free to decide the same in accordance with law as per his own wisdom and without being influenced by any of the observations made hereinabove while dismissing the appeal.