Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:133781 Court No. - 9 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 7517 of 2025 Petitioner :- Tarkeshvar Pandey Respondent :- Ms Gautam Realtors Private Limited And 11 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sr. Advocate,Vishakha Pande,Yashaswin Venugopal Bajpai Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. This petition has been filed challenging the order dated 06.03.2025 passed by the Trial Court i.e. Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)-2, Varanasi whereby, the trial court has rejected the request of the plaintiff to consider his amendment application first before proceeding to decide the injunction application for the reason that the High Court has expedited the injunction application. 2. Contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that initially suit was filed for injunction and the same was valued on the basis of rent to be paid by the petitioner-plaintiff, which was Rs.25,000/- per month. 3. Later on, the rent was enhanced by a separate agreement between plaintiff and the landlord to Rs.50,000/- per month. The said agreement is being placed as Annexure No.2 to the writ petition. It has been further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that because of the enhancement of rent, the valuation of the suit will exceed the limits of pecuniary jurisdiction of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) and therefore, it will more appropriate for Civil Judge (Junior Division) to have decided the application for amendment first and then should have proceeded to decide the application for interim injunction. 4. It has also been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that earlier, the learned trial court was of the view that amendment application is to be decided prior to the discussion on injunction application which is reflected in order dated 18.11.2024 filed along with Annexure No.9 to the writ petition. 5. Since, both the applications are pending before the trial court, no useful purpose would be served in keeping this petition pending. 6. It would be appropriate that the trial court be directed to decide the application for amendment first and then to proceed to decide the application for injunction. As, in case, according to petitioner, the application for amendment is allowed then, the Civil Judge (Junior Division) will have no jurisdiction to decide the suit as the same may be cognizable by the Civil Judge (Senior Division). 7. The present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)-2, Varanasi to decide the application for amendment Paper No.53-ka/77-ka, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned provided that there is no other legal impediment. 8. It is made clear that this Court has not examined the matter on merits and the application will be decided strictly in accordance with law. Order Date :- 7.8.2025 Priya (Manish Kumar Nigam, J.) Digitally signed by :- PRIYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad