Timely consideration of interim injunction application and prohibition on further construction until the application is decided.

Abhinava Upadhya,J.

Heard Sri Rahul Sahai, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ashish Kumar Srivastava as well as Sri Saurabh Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the order of the appellate court by which the interim injunction granted by the trial court of maintaining status by the parties with regard to the suit property has been rejected and the matter has been remanded back to the trial court to reconsider the interim injunction application.

3. A suit for permanent injunction being suit No.696 of 2007-Bholeshwar Nath and others Vs. Dinesh Chand has been filed for retraining the defendants from encroaching upon the property in dispute. In the said suit initially an exparte injunction was granted on 24.12.2007 and the appeal there after was filed under O.43R.1r CPC and the said appeal has now been decided by the order impugned dated 28.7.2014 rejecting the order of the status quo and remanding the matter back to the trial court to reconsider the interim injunction application. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the interim injunction of status quo was operating for 7 years and this writ petition can be disposed of with the direction to the trial court to consider the interim inunction application within a specified time and till that time earlier protection given can be allowed to continue.

4. In my view, no fruitful purpose will be served in keeping the writ petition pending as a direction is being issued to the trial court to decide the interim injunction application in the aforesaid suit within a time frame which the court will fix. Learned counsel for the parties upon instruction undertakes that no unnecessary adjourment will be taken by them.

5. Till the application under O.39 R.1 and 2 CPC is decided , the respondent no.1 shall not raise any further construction on the disputed site as claimed in the plaint.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that he will file his objection within a week and if said objection is filed within a week, the court may proceed to decide the application under O.39 R.1 and 2 CPC after hearing the counsel for the parties on the date fixed or any short date that the court may fix. Learned counsel for the parties undertake that they will not seek adjournment.

7. The court below will proceed with the matter without being influenced by any observations made by this Court and decide the case on its own merit.

8. With the aforesaid observations and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.