JUDGMENT Anil Kumar,J. Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the record. 2. As the controversy involved in the present case is trivial in nature so with the consent of learned counsels for the parties present today, the present writ petition is finally disposed of at the admission stage. Accordingly, notices to O.P.No. 2 is dispensed with. 3. Fact of the present case are that petitioner filed a Regular Suit No. 2727 of 2014 (Syed Ahmed Ahsan Rizvi Vs. Asfaq Ahmed) before Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Lucknow for permanent injunction in which an application has been moved under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC for temporary injunction, not decided till date. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that opposite party No. 1/Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Lucknow may be directed to decide the Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC read with Section 151 CPC pending in Regular Suit NO. 2727 of 2014 (Syed Ahmed Ahsar Rizvi Vs. Asfaq Ahmed) pending at his end expeditiously because the same is not decided till date and adjourned on one or other pretext adopted by the contesting respondents, hence present writ petition has been filed with by the petitioner for redressal of his grievances 5. Thus, after hearing learned counsel for parties and going through the records, writ petition is disposed of with a direction to opposite party No. 1/Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Lucknow is directed to decide the Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC read with Section 151 CPC pending in Regular Suit NO. 2727 of 2014 (Syed Ahmed Ahsar Rizvi Vs. Asfaq Ahmed) pending at his end expeditiously,say, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receiving certified copy of this order, after hearing learned counsel for parties in accordance with law.