` SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS WPMS No.3334 of 2025 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. Siddharth Sah, Advocate, and Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Rajendra Arya, Advocate for the petitioners. 2. Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Advocate for the respondent. 3. This writ petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, whereby the petitioners-plaintiffs have put to challenge the order dated 19.11.2025, passed by learned Ist Additional District Judge, Dehradun, in Misc. Civil Appeal No.88 of 2025, Digendra Singh Siddhu Vs. Ram Bahadur Rana and others, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner-plaintiffs was remanded and the order of ad interim injunction was modified. 4. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners- plaintiffs that there is illegality in the order, inasmuch as, the Order 41 Rule 27 of C.P.C. was wrongly resorted and considered and the appeal was remanded back to the trial court after modifying and the order passed by the trial court with a direction to decide the Application of Temporary Injunction No.6C2 on merits itself within a period of three weeks’ from the date of receipt of the order dated 19.11.2025 after affording an opportunity of hearing to both the parties. 5. I have perused the judgment and order impugned before this Court and in the opinion of this Court there is no illegality in the order. The appellate court in its wisdom has directed the trial court to decide the Application of Temporary Injunction No.6C2 within a time frame and till 2 the decision on the said application parties were directed to maintain the status quo and not to create third party interest. Therefore this Court is of the view that there is no illegality in the said judgment and order warranting interference.. 6. Accordingly writ petition stands dismissed. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 02.12.2025 SK