THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1483 of 2005 Yashbir Singh, S/O Sri Raghubir Singh, R/o 360 North East-125, Street Apartments 205, North Miami- 33161(USA) Through his wife and attorney Smt. Poonam W/O Sri Yashbir Singh R/o 322, Street No.1, Lane No.2, Rajendra Singh, Kaulagarh, Dehradun. …… Petitioner. Versus 1. Civil Judge(Senior Division) Dehradun. 2. Vikramjeet Marwah, S/o Sri Fami Shah Marwah, R/o Super Lita Paints Corporation 28-A,. Ashutosh Mukherjee Road, Calcutta- 20 Presently residing at Idgah, Chakrata Road, Dehradun, District- Dehradun. … Respondents. Sri Ramji Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mrs. Seema Sirohi, holding brief of learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no.1. Dated February 25, 2006. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. Heard learned counsel. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition for setting aside the order dated 12.12.2005 (Annexure No. 9 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent no.1 in Original Suit No 699 of 2005, whereby the learned Civil Judge had fixed 19.12.2005 for objection and disposal of application 6-C, moved by the plaintiff under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 C.P.C. Relevant facts giving rise to the writ petition are that the petitioner filed an original suit No. 699 of 2005, Yashbir Singh Vs. Vikramjeet Marwah in the court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division) Dehradun for permanent injunction on 12.12.2005. Along with the plaint, the plaintiff filed an application paper no. 6- C2 under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. for ad interim injunction against the respondent no.2. On this application, the trial court 2 issued notice to the O.P.-defendant. Aggrieved, the plaintiff- petitioner has come up in this Writ Petition. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the material on record, I am of the view that the ends of justice will be served if a direction is issued to the respondent no.1 for expeditious disposal of ad interim injunction application filed by the petitioner under Order 39, Rule 1 & 2 C.P.C. ( paper no. 6-C). By hearing the opposite-party-respondent no. 2 on the said application, no prejudice is going to be caused to the petitioner- plaintiff. Accordingly, the respondent no. 1 is directed to decide the application for temporary injunction filed by the petitioner under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. in Original Suit No. 699 of 2005 on merits in accordance with law expeditiously within four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of finally. (B.S. Verma, J.) M.K.