Judgment : 1. Heard 2. Rule, returnable forthwith. 3. Heard finally by consent. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that interim orders passed on 13.2.2014 and 11.3.2014, which are based upon the order passed on 22.10.2013 are arbitrary with the first order dated 22.10.2013 also being an arbitrary order. Learned counsel, therefore, submits that these orders are required to be interfered with in exercise of writ jurisdiction of this Court. 5. Learned counsel who appears on behalf of respondent nos. 3, 5 and 6 states that main application for grant of temporary injunction itself is now posted for hearing at 2.30p.m and he would have no objection, if the main application is directed to be heard and disposed of expeditiously. 6. Incidentally, respondent no. 3 is also power of attorney holder for remaining respondents except respondent no. 9. Since respondent no. 3 practically represents all the respondents except respondent no. 9, statement so made by him can be taken to be the statement on behalf of all the respondents, including respondent no.9, who is also stated to be a member of family of the respondents. 7. Even otherwise, considering the fact that the main application itself is being heard today by the Court below, it would be appropriate that this Court refrains itself from making any observations on the orders passed by the trial court at interlocutory stage which are impugned herein. 8. In this view of the matter and also having regard to the statement made by learned counsel for respondent nos. 3, 5 and 6, the writ petition deserves to be disposed of by issuing a direction that the main application be heard and disposed of expeditiously. Accordingly, Writ Petition is disposed of with the direction that application for temporary injunction shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously and in any case within 15 days from the date of this order. 9. Petition stands disposed of in the above terms. 10. Rule is discharged. 11. Authenticated copy of this judgment be furnished to the parties.