HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6271 of 2026 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. Heard Sri Rishikesh Tripathi, learned counsel for the defendant- petitioners. 2. In view of the order, which is being proposed to be passed today, notices are not being issued to the plaintiff-respondents. 3. The case of the defendant-petitioners is that an O.S. NO.328 of 2022 was instituted by the plaintiff-respondent before the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) for prohibitory as well as mandatory injunction, which came to be decreed on 08.03.2021, against which the defendant-petitioners preferred a Civil Appeal no.7 of 2021 before the Court of District Judge, Banda, which was admitted on 01.04.2021 and on stay, dates were fixed. Thereafter, on 30.04.2025, the stay application came to be decided, whereby though stay was not accorded, but the appeal was directed to be decided. In the meantime, the execution proceedings, an order came to be passed on 26.11.2025 seeking recourse from the Amin itself. The defendant-petitioner thereafter preferred an application on 17.12.2025 purported to be under Order 41 Rule 5 CPC read with Order 21 Rule 1 and 2 CPC further read with Section 151 of CPC. 4. Grievance of the writ petitioner is that though there is no stay order operating and the execution is proceeding, thus the very purpose of filing of appeal would stand redundant and he seeks to rely upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Mool Chand Yadav and another vs. Raza Buland Sugar Company Limited, Rampur and others, (1982) 3 SCC 484. 5. In the opinion of the Court, once an appeal against the decree which Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rishikesh Tripathi, Shashwat Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : Heera Lal And 4 Others .....Petitioner(s) Chandra Shekhar And Another .....Respondent(s) stands passed against the appellant/petitioner herein has been filed and on 17.12.2025, an application has been preferred under Order 41 Rule 5 read with Section 151 of CPC, then it is for the defendant-petitioner to approach the Court for grant of interim protection in this regard. Pertinently, the order dated 30.04.2025 has not been challenged whereby stay was not accorded, but the date was fixed. 6. On a pointed query being raised to the learned counsel for the defendant- petitioner as to what is the next date fixed in the appeal, he is not in a position to answer the same. 7. Be that as it may be, the Appellate Court is required to decide the application dated 17.12.2025 on the date fixed without granting unnecessary adjournments bearing in mind the judgment in the case of Mool Chand Yadav (supra) and the fact that the appeal stood in that regard. 8. With the said observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. May 5, 2026 N.S.Rathour A227 No. 6271 of 2026 2 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad