JUDGMENT : Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order, dated 17th December, 2010, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in CWP No. 2280 of 2007, titled Kaushlya Devi vs. State of H.P. and others, whereby the writ petition was dismissed on the premise that the lis relating to the subject matter of the writ petition was pending between the parties before the civil court also, (for short, the impugned judgment). 2. It is apt to reproduce paragraphs 8 and 9 of the impugned judgment hereunder: “8. Unless it is clearly established that the construction has, in fact, been raised on joint property of the parties, i.e. the petitioner and respondent No.7, no direction can be issued for revocation of revised-cum-completion plan, which purports to be in respect of construction, raised on respondent No.7’s exclusive property bearing Khasra No. 1524/1361/718/2/1. Respondents are disputing petitioner’s claim that construction has been raised on joint property, bearing Khasra No.1353/706. They have refuted the allegation not only in the present writ petition, but also in the suit, pending before the Civil Court. Matter is still pending with the Civil Court. The said Court has yet to decide whether the construction is on the joint property of the parties or exclusive property of respondent No.7. 9. In the facts and the circumstances of the case, as summed up hereinabove, right course for the petitioner is to approach the Civil Court where the suit is pending for revocation of revised-cum-completion plan, as a consequential relief to the relief of mandatory injunction, already sought by her.” 3. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the parties informed that the said Civil Suit bearing No.226/1 of 08/09, titled Sita Paul vs. Municipal Corporation, Shimla, is still pending adjudication before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court No.8, Shimla. 4. In view of the above, the writ petition was not maintainable and rightly came to be dismissed by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the impugned judgment merits to be upheld and the same is upheld. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed. However, the Civil Judge concerned is directed to decide the civil suit, referred to above, as early as possible, preferably within six months from today. Pending CMPs, if any, also stand disposed of.