JUDGMENT Hon'ble Ritu Raj Awasthi,J. Counter affidavit filed by the opposite party no.2 today, is taken on record. Heard Sri Anurag Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ashif Razzaq Khan, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 and perused the records. 2. The writ petition has been filed for suitable writ, order or direction to the Additional District Judge, Room No.3, Lucknow to decide the Execution Case No.12 of 2002 (Sudhir S. Halwasiya Vs. Deena Bank). It is also prayed that the opposite party no.1 shall pass appropriate order for release of amount of Rs.11,22,617.87 in favour of the petitioner, which has already been deposited in compliance of the judgment and decree dated 14.8.2002 passed in SCC suit no.21 of 2000. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is the landlord and the opposite party no.2 was the tenant of a portion in the ground floor of Halwasiya building situated at 11, Mahatma Gandhi Marg, Hazratganj, Lucknow in pursuance to the lease-deed dated 28.3.1995, which was executed between the petitioner and Sri Uma Shanker Halwasiya HUF as landlord and Dena Bank as the tenant on a monthly rent of Rs.25,644.50 along with taxes at the rate of 30.5% of the rent. The petitioner had filed a suit for arrears of rent, ejectment and claiming for the mesne profit and for termination of tenancy of opposite party no.2 in the Court of District Judge, Lucknow, which was registered as SCC Suit No.21 of 2000. The said suit was decreed by means of the judgement and decree dated 14.08.2002 in favour of the petitioner and against the opposite party no.2. The petitioner thereafter filed an application for execution under Section 21 Rule 11 C.P.C., which was registered as Execution Case No.12 of 2002 and the same is pending before the opposite party no.1. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the said execution case is pending since 2002 and the decree in question has not been executed, so far. 4. The leaned counsel for the bank has submitted that his objection under Section 47 C.P.C. read with Order XXI Rule 23(2) C.P.C. Is pending and unless and until the same are decided, the decreetal amount can not be paid to the petitioner. 4. The leaned counsel for the bank has submitted that his objection under Section 47 C.P.C. read with Order XXI Rule 23(2) C.P.C. Is pending and unless and until the same are decided, the decreetal amount can not be paid to the petitioner. Be as it may, without entering into the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that a suitable order or direction is required to the opposite party no.1 to decide the matter expeditiously in the interest of the parties. 5. In view of above, writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the learned courts below to make all possible efforts to decide the matter, expeditiously, within six months' from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before it. It is made clear that in case any adjournment is sought by the petitioner, the period of adjournment will be excluded from six months'. It has been agreed at the bar by the counsel for both the parties that no unnecessary adjournment will be taken in the matter and they will make all possible efforts to get the matter decided as early as possible. 6. With the aforesaid directions/observations, writ petition is disposed of finally.