IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.6288 of 2008 Date of decision:-17.03.2009. Radhey Shyam ...Petitioner Versus Satbir and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present:- Mr. S.K. Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner. JASWANT SINGH J.(Oral) This revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 30.10.2008 (Annexure P-3) passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gurgaon in the civil suit for mandatory and permanent injunction filed by the petitioner-plaintiffs, whereby the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC filed by the petitioner-plaintiffs has been adjourned for hearing on 21.04.2009. It is averred that in the suit, the petitioner-plaintiffs is/are praying for directing the respondent No.2-SDO, DHBVN, Pataudi, District Gurgaon to shift the tubewell connection, already in the name of the petitioner to a new site. In the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 the learned Trial Court issued notice to the respondents for 21.04.2009. Subsequently, an application was moved by the petitioner-plaintiffs for preponing the date and the same was declined vide impugned order dated 30.10.2008 (Annexure P-3). The record of the revision petition reveals that the revision petition was dismissed in default on 17.11.2008 for want of prosecution and C.R. No.6288 of 2008 (O & M) -2- thereafter on application, moved for recalling the order dated 17.11.2008, the revision petition was restored vide order dated 25.11.2008 to its original number. Notice of motion was also issued for 17.03.2009. As per office report, process fee for service of the respondents was not filed and therefore, the present case is at the initial stage. Learned counsel states that since sufficient time has already elapsed, therefore, he does not press this present revision petition. However, he prays that the learned Trial Court be directed to decide the pending application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC within a timeframe. In view of the fact that the respondents have already been served before the learned Trial Court, this petition is disposed of with the direction to the learned Trial Court to decide the application of the petitioner-plaintiffs under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 expeditiously. With the aforesaid direction, the present revision petition is disposed of. March 17, 2009 (JASWANT SINGH) vj JUDGE