HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5122 of 2025 Court No. - 7 HON'BLE JASPREET SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Virendra Kumar Shukla, learned counsel has put in appearance on behalf of the private-respondent. 2. By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks a direction from this Court for expeditious disposal of Misc. Civil Appeal No.63/2025, filed under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) CPC. It is also prayed that till such time, the appeal be heard/ad interim injunction application filed in appeal be decided, since the private-respondent is raising construction, hence, an appropriate direction be issued for restraining the private-respondent from raising construction. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a supplementary affidavit, which is taken on record. 4. Considering the aforesaid submissions and also perusal of the material on record, it indicates that a suit for injunction has been filed. An application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC was moved, however, it was not being considered and in the aforesaid backdrop, the petitioner had filed a Writ Petition No.3240 of 2025 (A-227), wherein a Coordinate Bench of this Court by means of the order dated 27.05.2025 directed the trial Court to consider the application for injunction within six weeks and for that limited period, an order of status-quo was passed. 5. Be that as it may, the trial Court after hearing the parties finally decided the application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC and rejected it by Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Gudiya Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : Virendra Kumar Shukla Ali Ahmad .....Petitioner(s) Ziya Lal .....Respondent(s) means of the order dated 28.07.2025. 6. The petitioner being aggrieved has preferred misc. civil appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) CPC, which is engaging the attention of the appellate Court. 7. The order passed by the appellate Court has been brought on record with the supplementary affidavit indicating that the appeal has been entertained and registered and since the private-respondent had appeared on caveat, accordingly, the application for ad interim injunction for hearing has been fixed on 22.09.2025. 8. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances where the matter is already fixed before the First Appellate Court, this Court is not inclined to entertain the petition at this stage, leaving it open for the petitioner to press his application before the Court concerned, however, it is observed that since the matter is now listed on 22.09.2025, an endeavour would be made by the First Appellate Court to consider and decide the pending application for ad interim injunction on the next date itself. In case, if the same is not possible then within three week thereafter. Since, the private- respondent has already put in appearance before this Court, it is also directed to ensure that in case he wishes to file any pleadings or objections in the appeal, he shall do the same within a week prior to the date fixed and the matter be considered and decided as observed above, but without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties preferably as expeditiously as possible. 9. It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merits and the Court concerned shall consider and decide the case of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law. 10. With the aforesaid observations, the petition is disposed of. September 2, 2025 Rakesh/- A227 No. 5122 of 2025 2 (Jaspreet Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAKESH PRAJAPAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench