Court No. - 5 Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 172 of 2024 Appellant :- Sandeep Singh Chhabra Respondent :- Anil Singh Chhabra Counsel for Appellant :- Ghufran Hussain Counsel for Respondent :- Yogesh Chandra Srivastava Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J. 1. Heard Sri Ghufran Hussain, leaned counsel for the appellant and Sri Yogesh Chandra Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. In pursuance to the earlier order of this Court dated 03.04.2025, Sri Sandeep Singh Chhabra, the appellant and Sri Anil Singh Chhabra, the respondent are present before this Court. 3. Both the parties who are real brothers state that there is no occasion for them to appear before the Mediation Center of this Court to settle the matter amicably despite they having filed the proposal on the basis of which the matter could have been amicably settled.. 4. Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the contesting parties state that the matter is still pending for consideration before the learned trial Court and an amendment application in the suit has already been filed which has been allowed on 24.04.2025. 5. Both the learned counsels pray that the learned trial Court be directed to decide the matter within a specified time taking into consideration the acrimony which is existing between the brothers and in order to have a quietus in the matter. 6. Considering the aforesaid and the fact that the suit is still pending for consideration before the learned trial Court as such, the instant appeal is disposed of with a direction to the learned trial Court, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the instant case, to make an endevour to decide the civil suit in accordance with law after hearing all the parties concerned without granting any unnecessary adjournments which suit would be decided within a period of six months from the date the certified copy of this order is brought on record. 7. Till then, all the parties shall maintain status quo as it exists today pertaining to the property in dispute. 8. Sri Ghufran Hussain, leaned counsel for the appellant states that no interference would be caused in the running of the cafe by the respondent. 9. Sri Yogesh Chandra Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent states that he would not be interfering in the property of the appellant till the matter is finally decided by the learned trial Court. 10. The aforesaid statements of the learned counsels for the parties are recorded. Order Date :- 1.5.2025 Pachhere/- Digitally signed by :- SATYENDRA SINGH PACHHERE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench