Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 23.05.2019 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No.1, Faizabad in Misc. Appeal No. 11 of 2015, Kalika Prasad and others Vs. Keshav Ram and others.
The learned counsel for the petitioner prays for a direction to the learned trial court, Civil Judge (J.D.)-IIIrd, Faizabad to decide Regular Suit No. 657 of 1994 and the temporary injunction application therein at the earliest.
The learned trial court and even the appellate court has not been arrayed as respondent in this petition. The learned counsel for petitioner prays for and is granted leave to array both the courts as proforma respondents in the array of respondents today itself.
From a perusal of the order dated 23.05.2019, challenged in this writ petition, it is apparent that the appellate court has interfered in the order of the learned trial court on the ground that there are only three conditions for grant of temporary injunction, which three conditions have not been fulfilled by the learned trial court and no consideration thereof has been undertaken by the learned trial court while passing the order dated 24.04.2014. The appellate court has referred to Two Judgements of this Court, namely M/s. Savvy Homes Vs. Nikhil Induksh, 2012 All.C.J. 309 and Subhash Chandra Sharma Vs. Smt. Rajni Tyagi, 2014, All.C.J. 1767, to observe that the balance of convenience, the question of irreparable loss and prima facie case should have been considered before the order of status quo should have been passed by the learned trial court.
It is apparent that the Regular Suit No. 657 of 1994, Kalika Prasad and others Vs. Keshav Ram and others, has been pending for past more than 24 years. There is no question of direction to be issued to decide the application for temporary injunction in such a matter where pleadings have already been exchanged, evidence have been led, therefore, this Court disposes of this writ petition with the direction to the learned trial court to decide the regular suit itself at the earliest, say within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 30.8.2019 Mustaqeem