JUDGMENT : Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J. By the medium of instant writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: “A. That the respondents may kindly be directed not to interfere in the suit land without the process of law especially during the adjudication before this Hon’ble Court. B. That the compensation may kindly be awarded to the petitioner for causing loss to the property by cutting of mango/fruit trees and dismantling the huge portion of the temple complex just at their whims and fancies which is permissible under law only after going through the appropriate law or process of law. C. That ad-interim directions may kindly be issued to the respondents not to interfere in the land of petitioner without process of law, especially, during the pendency of the present petition. D. Record of the case may kindly be called for from all the respondents and also the record pertaining to the civil suit pending in the court of Ld. Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) Court No.1, Sarkaghat, Mandi.” 2. The petitioner, in paragraph 10 of the writ petition, has averred that with respect to the property in question, a civil suit is pending before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No.1, Sarkaghat, District Mandi, H.P. 3. On noticing the said factum, this Court on 22nd June, 2016 directed the petitioner (plaintiff before the Civil Court) to place on record a copy of the civil suit pending before the Civil Judge, stands filed. 4. The learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner argued that despite the petitioner having filed the civil suit and the application for interim injunction, the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No.1, Sarkaghat, District Mandi, H.P. has not granted any interim injunction, due to which the petitioner was forced to approach this Court by filing the petition in hand. 5. A perusal of the copy of the civil suit shows that the petitioner has prayed for declaration and permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the rights of the petitioner and his possession. Alongwith the main suit, an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, CPC) was also filed, but no ex parte interim relief was granted by the Civil Court and the application is still pending. 6. Alongwith the main suit, an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, CPC) was also filed, but no ex parte interim relief was granted by the Civil Court and the application is still pending. 6. It appears that the petitioner is constrained to file the instant writ petition since the Civil Court has not passed any order on the application for grant of interim relief. The petitioner/plaintiff cannot be ignorant to the fact that, in case, no orders were passed by the Civil Court on the application for grant of interim relief, even then the plaintiff has a remedy. 7. It is beaten law of the land that in case a civil suit is pending, for the same relief a writ petition is not maintainable. Accordingly, it is held that the instant writ petition is not maintainable. 8. However, before parting with, the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No.1 Sarkaghat, District Mandi H.P. is directed to decide the application for interim relief within two weeks from 30th June, 2016, after hearing the parties. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, alongwith pending CMPs, if any.