2025:HHC:30838 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 361 of 2022 Decided on: 09.09.2025 Joga Ram and another … Petitioners Versus Bal Krishan and another .… Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ___________________________________________________________________ For the petitioners : Mr. Sanjay Jaswal, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Ajay Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Tarun Brakta, Advocate for respondent No. 1. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) When the case was taken up for consideration today, learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that respondent No. 2 is dead. He submitted that for the purpose of adjudication of this petition, name of respondent No. 2 be deleted from the array of respondents. Ordered accordingly. 2. By way of this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have assailed the order passed by learned Appellate Court in an appeal preferred by the respondents herein filed under Order 43, Rule 1(r) of the Civil Procedure Code, in terms whereof, the order passed by the learned Trial Court in an application filed under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:30838 the Civil Procedure Code was set aside. 3. A perusal of the record of this case demonstrates that when this case was listed before this Court on 16.08.2022, this Court directed the parties to maintain status quo qua the suit property. This order is continuing till date and the Court has been informed that now the main suit is listed before learned Court below on 13.10.2025 for the purpose of final hearing. Though, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents submitted that there is no perversity in the order under challenge and this petition deserves dismissal, however, this Court is of the considered view that as the parties have maintained status quo qua the suit property since August, 2022 in terms of order passed by this Court, it would be in the interest of justice, in case, this petition is disposed of by directing the parties to maintain status quo qua the suit property and with further direction to the learned Trial Court to make an endeavour to decide the civil suit on the next date of hearing and if not possible on the said date, then as expeditiously as possible. Ordered accordingly. 4. Ordered accordingly. 4. This petition is disposed of with the observation that the parties shall maintain status quo qua the suit property with further direction to the learned Trial Court to decide the civil suit, if possible on the next date of hearing and if for some reason, the matter is not heard on the said date, then the suit be heard by fixing a date and 3 2025:HHC:30838 be decided before 30.11.2025. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge September 09, 2025 (narender)