B. S. A. SWAMY, J. ( 1 ) THIS revision petition is for orders of the Court, as to whether the civil revision petition ivmaintainable against an order of ex parte injunction passed under order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 CPC which is an appealable order. ( 2 ) THE learned Counsel for the petitioners brought to my notice that the respondent herein filed OS No. 200 of 2000 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, addanki, Prakasham District for specific performance of an agreement of sale and also filed IA No. 880 of 2000 seeking a temporary injunction restraining the petitioners herein from interfering with his possession. The Court below seemed to have granted an ex parte injunction on 3-8-2000. Thereafter the petitioner herein seemed to have filed the counter on 31-8-2000 and the matter was posted for hearing on 6-9-2000. Subsequently at the instance of the respondents herein the court adjourned the hearing of the interlocutory application to 12-9-2000 and posted to 29-9-2000. Apprehending that the court may not dispose of the interlocutory application, the petitioner herein filed this revision petition. ( 3 ) FROM a report published in hindu dated 26-9-2000, it is seen that the supreme Court condemned the practice of the Courts in not disposing of the interlocutory applications. In fact, Their lordships have gone to the extent of observing that the High Court should call for the explanation and take disciplinary action, in suitable cases, when the conduct of the Judicial Officers is not in furtherance of the cause of the justice. ( 4 ) WITHOUT going into the merits of the contention, whether the present civil revision petition is maintainable or not, i would like to pass the following order: any Court which has granted ex parte orders is bound to dispose of the same on merits as and when the respondents enter their appearance and express their willingness to argue the matter. It is a common practice that the learned Counsel having obtained ex parte orders would not co-operate with the Courts in disposing of the application on merits and try to seek adjournments on one pretext or the other. The practice of adjourning the matters at the request of me parties who obtained ex parte orders has to be discouraged. It is a common practice that the learned Counsel having obtained ex parte orders would not co-operate with the Courts in disposing of the application on merits and try to seek adjournments on one pretext or the other. The practice of adjourning the matters at the request of me parties who obtained ex parte orders has to be discouraged. Further, under Rule 3 of Order XXXIX of the CPC, a duty is cast on the Court, which granted ex parte injunction to dispose of the same on merits within thirty days, but the courts are not following this mandatory provision resulting in grave injustice to the parties who suffered adverse orders. Hence, it is made clear that the Court which granted ex parte orders has to pass orders on merits at the earliest possible time without dragging on the proceedings, more so at the instance of the parties who obtained such ex parte orders. If the party, who obtained the ex parte order is not co-operating with the Court, the Court is always at liberty to vacate such an interim order. ( 5 ) IN the light of the view taken by him, I direct the learned Principal Junior civil Judge, Addanki, Prakasham District to hear the mater on 29-9-2000 and pass orders on merits on the same day, whether he intends to continue the injunction order or not. ( 6 ) TILL the disposal of the application for injunction on merits, the ex parte orders obtained by the respondents herein shall be kept in abeyance. ( 7 ) WITH the directions as above, the civil revision petition is disposed of. No costs.