Heard Sri Anurendra Nath Mishra, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Vivek Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Sri U.N. Misra, learned counsel for O.P.No. 1 and perused the record.
As the controversy involved in the present case is trivial in nature so with the consent of learned counsels for the parties present today, the present writ petition is finally disposed of at the admission stage. Accordingly, notice to O.P.No. 2 dispensed with.
Facts of the present case are that petitioner/plaintiff field a suit for permanent injunction registered as Regular Suit No. 296/12 in which he has moved an application for grant of temporary injunction under order 39 Rule 1 CPC, till date no heed has been paid till date, hence present writ petition has been filed with prayer that court below may be directed to decide the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC expeditiously.
Thus, after hearing learned counsel for parties and going through the records, the interest of justice will sub-serve in the present case, if opposite party No. 1/Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Hardoi (East) is directed to consider the grievance of the petitioner which he has raised in the present writ petition.
For the foregoing reasons, writ petition is disposed of with a direction to opposite party No. 1/Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Hardoi (East) is directed to decide the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC moved in Regular Suit No. 296/12 expeditiously after hearing learned counsel for parties in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 17.10.2014 Ravi/