Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:100766 Court No. - 9 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6046 of 2025 Petitioner :- Abhay Kumar Jha Respondent :- Rakesh Kasana And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vineet Kumar Singh Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the records. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- "(i) Issue a suitable direction or order directing the defendant- respondents to maintain status quo with regard to nature, character and possession over the suit property namely Plot No.30 area 860 square meters situate at Pocket Bhagmalpuram, Greater Noida, District Gautam Buddh Nagar and not to create any third party rights concerning the suit property pending disposal of the temporary injunction application being Paper No.6C2 filed in Original Suit No.920 of 2025 (Abhay Kumar Jha Vs. Rakesh Kasana and Others). (ii) Issue a suitable order or direction commanding the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gautam Buddh Nagar to consider and decide the temporary injunction application being Paper No.6C2 filed in Original Suit No.920 of 2025 (Abhay Kumar Jha Vs. Rakesh Kasana and Others) within a period of time specified by this Hon'ble Court." 3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that an agreement to sell was executed in favour of the petitioner by one Yogesh, who was the owner/ allottee of the property in the year 2006. The said owner/allotee, Yogesh also executed an agreement to sell in the year 2006 in favour of one Amit Kasana. Amit Kasana filed a suit for specific performance of agreement to sell executed in his favour. In the aforesaid suit, the petitioner filed an application for impleadment, which has been allowed and the petitioner was added as defendant in the suit. The petitioner has also filed a suit for specific performance of agreement executed in his favour by Yogesh and the said suit is pending. It has also been submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the respondent No. -1 Rakesh Kasana was witness in the earlier agreement to sell executed by Yogesh in favour of Amit Kasana and had knowledge of all the earlier transactions made between the parties. Rakesh Kasana, respondent No. 1, filed Original Suit No. 1921 of 2024 for specific performance of an agreement, allegedly, executed in his favour by Yogesh on 03.10.2011. The said suit has been decreed ex-parte by judgment and decree dated 09.05.2025. The petitioner has filed the present suit being Suit No. 920 of 2025 challenging the ex-parte decree passed in favour of respondent No. 1- Rakesh Kasana. In the aforesaid suit, the petitioner also filed an application for interim injunction on which notices have been issued fixing 22.07.2025. It has been further contended by counsel for the petitioner that the courts below have erred in law in not granting temporary injunction. It has been prayed by learned counsel for the petitioners that the application for interim injunction be directed to be decided expeditiously and till then parties may be directed to maintain status quo. 4. Admittedly, no execution application has been filed by now for executing the judgment and decree dated 09.05.2025 passed in favour of respondent No. 1- Rakesh Kasana. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is every likelihood that the defendant in the suit filed by Rakesh Kasana, may execute the sale deed in favour of Rakesh Kasana after obtaining the permission from the authority for which efforts are being made by the respondent. Unfortunately, no such averment has been made in the writ petition, though it has been argued by counsel for the petitioner. 5. In any view of the matter, since the matter is pending before Civil Judge and 22.07.2025 is the next date fixed, it is expected that the application for interim injunction shall be considered and decided by Civil Judge (Senior Division) Gautam Buddh Nagar where the Original Suit No. 920 of 2025 is pending on the next date fixed and in case, for some reason, he is unable to decide the same on the next date fixed, the same shall be decided within two weeks thereafter, in accordance with law after providing opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 1.7.2025 Nitika Sri. (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Digitally signed by :- NITIKA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad