( 1 ) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

( 2 ) THIS writ petition is by the defendant in Original Suit No. 385 of 2002.

( 3 ) AN application for interim injunction was moved by the plaintiff in the suit. The trial court by its order dated 16. 5. 2002. Annexure-4 to this petition, stated that it was of the opinion after examining the record that it was not a fit case for grant of ex parte interim injunction without hearing the other side and accordingly issued notices fixing 11. 7. 2002.

( 4 ) AGAINST this order, the plaintiff preferred Civil Revision No. 526 of 2002, which has been allowed by the impugned order dated 25. 5. 2002 passed by the District Judge. Allahabad.

( 5 ) WHILE allowing the revision, the learned District Judge has directed the parties to maintain status quo in respect of the disputed house till the date fixed, i. e. , 11. 7. 2002 and also directed that the application for interim injunction be decided on merits by the trial court on the next date, i. e. , 11. 7. 2002.

( 6 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has argued that the revision was not maintainable in view of the Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of U. P