its a basic principal that application must be decided before recording evidene

You submit before the court to dismiss the application filed by the plaintiff.
 

You can request to the court for arguments and in arguments you can show the conduct of plaintiff also.

Is the counter filed ?. If its so, then i wonder why the application has been kept pending for a long time. What happened in the enquiry stage ?. You can insist the court to dismiss the application arguing your counter and also stating that no harm or hardship will be caused to the applicant and thats the reason he has remained silent for more than a year. Application made under O.39 are all of emergent nature and they cant be delayed for such a long time...

You ask the court to conduct enquiry in the I.A. and pass final orders. If the Plaintiff is absent then let the court be requested to dismiss the I.A. and raise the order of Interim Injunction, giving relief to you. You tell the court, let the Plaintiff come and restore it, if the Plaintiff is really interested in it. The court cannot suo moto, on its own, extend, the Interim Injunction unless the party concerned requests for extension.

Yes, i agree with all the above

I have just go through your problem, there are several judgements of h'nble guj.high court which state that apllication under c.p.c o 39 r1 should dispossed under 30 days, your plaintiff's conduct shows that he dosent want immidiat disposal of related aplication and trying to misuse the process of law in case of tamporary injuction conduct of party is very esantial, there there are several judgements of h'nble supreme court which state that apllication under c.p.c o. 39 r1conduct of party is not proper T. injuction  should not be granted you can go through this line for convencing rejection of apllication under c.p.c o 39 r1