Order

SANJEET PUROHIT, J.

1. Present writ petition has been preferred challenging order dated 27.08.2026 passed by learned Trial Court, whereby the application filed by petitioner-plaintiff under Section 151 CPC was dismissed and the prayer for staying the proceedings in relation to Application No. 32/2023 filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC was denied.

2. Briefly stated, facts germane to present writ petition, as stated by learned counsel for the petitioner, are as under.

2.1 Petitioner herein instituted a suit, being Civil Original Suit No.18/2023, seeking partition and mandatory injunction in respect of the suit land, along with an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC, bearing No. 32/2023, seeking temporary injunction.

2.2 During pendency of the suit, an application under Section 39 of the Baratiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, read with Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, was filed, praying for examination through FSL of the signatures of defendant No.2 as appearing on the Vakalatnama, written statement and the applications filed during pendency of suit. Said application was rejected by learned Trial Court, which order of rejection was challenged by petitioner-plaintiff by way of S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20483/2026.

2.3 Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide its order dated 20.08.2026, issued notice to respondents and passed an interim order in favour of petitioner, staying further proceedings in Civil Original Suit No. 18/2023.

2.4 Subsequent to the passing of said order dated 20.08.2026, petitioner-plaintiff filed an application under Section 151 CPC before learned Trial Court, stating therein that since further proceedings in the suit had already been stayed by this Court, proceedings in relation to the application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC should also be stayed as said application is part and parcel of the same suit.

2.5 Said application was contested by respondents-defendants on the ground that stay of the suit proceedings would not automatically amount to stay of proceedings in respect of the application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC. It was further submitted that, in view of the directions issued by this Court in another writ petition, namely, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9424/2026, said application was required to be decided in a time-bound manner.

2.6 Learned Trial Court, after considering the submissions of both the parties, dismissed the application vide order dated 27.08.2026, observing that no specific directions had been passed by this Court to stay further proceedings of Civil Miscellaneous Case No. 32/2023, i.e., the application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC. Learned Trial Court also took into consideration the directions issued by this Court in aforesaid writ petition, bearing No. 9424/2026, as to decide said application within a period of 30 days.

2.7 Aggrieved by said order dated 27.08.2026, petitioner has approached this Court by way of present petition.

3. Challenging said order dated 27.08.2026, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the proceedings in relation to the Civil Original Suit No. 18/2023 have already been stayed by this Court vide order dated 20.08.2026, propriety demands that further proceedings in relation to the temporary injunction application should also be stayed, as such application constitutes a part of original suit itself.

3.1 It was further submitted that Section 2(14) of CPC defines an “order” as a formal expression of any decision of Civil Court which is not a decree. Orders are also executable under Section 36 CPC and, therefore, according to learned counsel, if the rights of the parties are allowed to be adjudicated upon under the temporary injunction application, the same would run contrary to the object of granting stay on the suit proceedings itself.

3.2 As regards the effect and applicability of order dated 12.08.2026 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9424/2026 whereby directions were given for expeditio