IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 7847 of 2010 Date of decision : December 02, 2010 Mam Chand ....Petitioner versus Ram Saran and others ....Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal Present : Mr. VD Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral) Plaintiff Mam Chand by filing the instant revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to the trial court i.e. learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jagadhri to decide application for temporary injunction Annexure P/2 moved by plaintiff- petitioner in civil suit no. 424 dated 8.11.2008 titled Mam Chand versus Ram Saran and others instituted vide plaint Annexure P/1. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner filed suit along with application for temporary injunction on 8.11.2008 and even defendants/respondents filed reply dated 9.12.2008 Annexure P/3 to the application but inspite thereof application for temporary injunction has not been disposed of by the trial court although almost two years have lapsed since then. Civil Revision No. 7847 of 2010 -2- It is prima facie manifest that the trial court has unnecessarily delayed the disposal of plaintiff's application for temporary injunction for almost two years. There appears to be no justification for such long delay because applications for temporary injunction are supposed to be disposed of expeditiously as otherwise the very purpose of moving the applications would be defeated. For the reasons aforesaid, the instant revision petition is allowed and trial court is directed to decide the application Annexure P/2 moved by the plaintiff/petitioner for temporary injunction in accordance with law within two months from the next date of hearing in the trial court which is stated to be 3.1.2011. ( L.N. Mittal ) December 02, 2010 Judge 'dalbir'