Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:140347 Court No. - 9 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 9163 of 2025 Petitioner :- Champa Devi And 3 Others Respondent :- Pushpendra Kumar Singh And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jagriti Shukla,Neeraj Kumar Srivastava Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. This writ petition has been filed for direction for the compliance of interim injunction order granted by the Trial Court. 3. This Court is not an executing Court for the orders passed by the Revenue Court / Trial Court. 4. Petitioners may avail the remedy, as available to them, under the relevant provisions of CPC for compliance of injunction orders passed by the Trial Court. 5. Second prayer made is for expediting the suit of 2025, the same cannot be done as the suit is of the year 2025. No such direction can be issued in view of the judgment of this Court passed in the case of Ali Shad Usmani vs. Ali Isteba; 2015 (2) ADJ 250 (DB). The Division Bench of this Court in case of Ali Shad Usmani (supra) has held that no direction can be issued to the sub-ordinate courts for deciding the suit within stipulated period. Relevant portion of the judgment is extracted hereunder:- "We are not inclined to issue a direction for the expeditious hearing of a Civil Suit which is pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), District-Azamgarh. It would be most inappropriate to Court to entertain a writ petition under Article 226 and/or under Article 227 of the Constitution simply for the purpose of expediting the hearing of a suit. Such orders, if granted, place a class of litigants, who move the court in a separate and preferential category whereas other cases which may be of similar or greater antiquity and urgency are left to be decided in the normal channel. Hence, any such direction may be issued with the greatest care and circumspection by the High Court otherwise the Civil Courts will be overburdened only with requests for expeditious disposal of suits, which have been expedited by the High Court. Most of the litigants cannot afford the expense of moving the High court and would not, therefore, be in a position to have the benefit of such an order. Ultimately, it must be left to the judicious exercise of discretion of the concerned Court to determine whether a ground for urgency has been made out. We emphasize that there may be other cases such as involving senior citizens, those who are differently abled or people suffering from a particular disability socio-economic or otherwise which may prime cause of urgent disposal. It is for the learned Trial Judge in each case to apply his or her mind and decide whether the hearing of the suit to be expedited. For these reasons, we are not inclined to entertain the petition. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to cost." 6. Consequently, the writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 18.8.2025 Rishabh [Manish Kumar Nigam, J.] Digitally signed by :- RISHABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad