ETITE$NE PR Riaintifi Jt a ag& 65 m, ag366 hmwr vea Lae Sal a ess101 Culva ann illage Maip os d Jau Nag& Tabsn SurpLu, Dstt. Surguja (CG) Versus ESRDNDENTs 1 . Dfendants Chinta Ram! a'gad 50 y€ars Shiv Shankér, aged 30 years Sfo. Shn‘ Chintar Ram Shodhi Ram,~ aged 65 years, S] o._ Lat€ Shri RijhaJl A11 thc above raspondents are r/o Vlnage Madanpur, Post and P S Jal Nagar, TahSJl’ Surajpur axid Dist: SurguJa (CG) , 4. \ Th6 Skate of C.G., through the Conector, Distt. Surguja (CG) WRIT FETITIQN UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE (KmlSTiTUTIGN OF INDIA Ayyeamnce: Shri J.A. Lohani, couasel for the petitioner. ShnJ K Shastn counsel £01 respondents No 1 to 3. J Shn Pankaj Shnvastava, Panel lawyel for the #/f State] Iesgaondent No 4 om oknER {22.04.2009} With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard 'many. Chailenge 1n the present wnt petttlon ls the oreer dated 6 09 2008 passed by the @econd. A&d1t10na1 Dlstnct 0 t hm ml Qajwr ~B‘, p?of1 utoz— Va rfo V anm Pt an § aJ l R Suguna ¥ Judge (FTC), Surajpur in Misc. Civil App€al No. 11f2068 confirming the omer of trial Court dated 27.022008 refusing the grant of mmporaiy i‘ajurictien in favour of the plaimjif. it is very fairiy submittsd by lealnad counsel for the peti’riorier that the suit is pending since 28‘0§.2007. Likewise, fhe‘appHcafioa for temperaxy mjunciion was filed at the same time. Leamed counsel for the petitioner further sabmits that the Written statements have already been filed, issues have been frmneti and the aiiidavit uilder Oltier 18 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure on behalf of the plaintiff has aleo been filed. l have perused the impugned order and the relevant tlocuments: filed in support of the writ petition. Both the courts below have found that no imma facie case is made l out in favour of the plaint‘tff for ‘graht of temyorary iujunction and thetefore, the applications were rejected. I find no error apparent oh the face of record, to interfere with the reasoned orders passed by the courts below. The petition is accordingly dismissed. As the suit is pending since 28.06.2007, it is expectecl that the suit itself will be decided expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this ‘order. It wouid be the duty of the petitioner to submit the v‘ order of this Court before the trial court so that the matter will he decided expeditiously. Needless to say that the plaintiff and the‘defendants will cooperate in early disposal of the suit. Sdl- i i l . K i, P.nt'mkef Diwakevr l , . ‘ i l r \ Judge ‘