JUDGMENT Hon’ble Umeshwar Pandey, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner. 2. In this petition the petitioner challenges the appellate Court’s order whereby the Court below has interfered into trial Court’s order granting temporary injunction in favour of the petitioner and has set aside the same. 3. Admittedly the petitioner received a notice under Section 211 of the U.P. Municipalities Act, Annexure-1 to the supplementary affidavit stating that the chabutra in front of his house being an encroachment over the road ‘patri’ be removed within a period of seven days failing which it would be so removed by the Municipality at his costs. Challenging this notice the petitioner moved the civil Court with an injunction suit praying for a relief that the defendant Municipal Board be restrained from demolishing the said chabutra which exists in petitioner’s land. The plaintiff side by side also moved the Court with a prayer under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. which was finally heard by the trial Court and temporary injunction was granted vide Annexure-2 to the petition. Respondent the Municipal Board went in appeal against the said order and the appellate Court has reversed trial Court’s order stating that petitioner instead of going in a regular suit should have resorted to an appeal under Section 318 of the U.P. Municipalities Act against the said notice. The forum of appeal being available to the plaintiff, the prayer of temporary injunction was refused by the appellate Court. 4. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that in the present suit the jurisdiction of the civil Court is not completely barred and the availability of appellate remedy against a notice under Section 211 of the Municipalities Act, would not make a title suit as incompetent. 5. Whether or not the availability of forum of appeal will absolutely bar the jurisdiction of a civil Court in the present matter is a question which is to be decided in the suit. If there was no exigency of filing the suit without going in appeal before the competent authority under Section 318 of Municipalities Act, the forum of appeal being definitely available to the petitioner, he should have first resorted to it and there he could allege and show that the disputed chabutra is located in his property and not on the road ‘patri’ as claimed by the Municipal Board. Therefore, without giving any finding upon the said question, I hereby dispose of this writ petition with the observation that the petitioners may go in appeal within a period of 15 days and no more, hereinafter before the competent authority and seek the remedy available to him from there. Till the date of filing of the appeal the said chabutra in question for which the notice has been served upon the petitioner, will not be demolished. 6. This order will not be operative after the expiry of the period referred to above. Order Accordingly. ———