SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS WPMS 2299/2024 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Ms. Sadaf, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Nikhil Singhal, Advocate, for the respondents. (2) Petitioner is plaintiff in O.S. No. 2 of 2020 pending before Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Haridwar. Defendant to the suit filed application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, which was rejected by the Trial Court vide order dated 13.3.2020. By the same order, learned Trial Court granted temporary injunction in favour of the petitioner, without hearing on the application filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC by the plaintiff. Respondents challenged Trial Court’s order by filing revision, which has been allowed by learned 4th Additional District Judge, Haridwar vide judgment dated 12.1.2024. By the said judgment, learned Revisional Court set aside Trial Court’s order dated 13.3.2020 and remanded the matter back to the Trial Court for consideration of application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC afresh. (3) Learned Revisional Court has given valid reasons for setting aside the Trial Court’s order. It has been held that the bar under Section 331 U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act was not properly considered by the Trial Court while taking decision on the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. (4) This Court is not inclined to interfere with the remand order. Reasons assigned for remanding the matter back cannot also be faulted. Accordingly, writ petition fails and is dismissed. (5) Since temporary injunction application, filed by the petitioner, is pending, therefore, Trial Court is directed to dispose of the same within four weeks. Till disposal of the said application, parties shall neither create any third party interest nor change the nature of the suit property. (6) It is made clear that the Trial Court will decide the temporary injunction application independently, without being influenced by the order passed by this Court. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 9.1.2025 Pr