IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No.406 of 2011 (M/S) Shyam Singh ..… Petitioner Versus Vijay Jain & three others ….. Respondents Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. M.K. Goyal, Advocate for the respondents Hon’ble B.S. Verma, J. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 24.7.2010 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Laksar and the order dated 22.12.2010 passed by Additional District Judge/IIIrd FTC, Haridwar, in Misc. Civil Appeal No.83/2010, Shyam Singh Vs. Vijay Jain and others, whereby both the courts below have rejected the application for temporary injunction. The case of the petitioner is that he filed a suit for cancellation of sale deed which was executed by the plaintiff himself. It is alleged that the sale deed in question was executed by misrepresentation and playing fraud with the plaintiff petitioner. The suit is pending for disposal. The sale deed is not void. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the orders impugned. Prima facie, as on today, the sale deed in question is in favour of the respondents/defendants. In the present case, it is to be seen whether the sale deed was executed by playing fraud on the plaintiff or not. Factual scrutiny in the matter is required. This Court, 2 in its writ jurisdiction, cannot decide the disputed question of fact. The writ petition lacks merit and is dismissed in limine. However, the trial court is directed to decide the suit, as expeditiously as possible. (B.S. Verma, J.) 9.3.2011 RG 2