JUDGMENT : LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed aggrieved by the docket order, dated 20.03.2023, and the consequential extension order dated 29.12.2023 in IA.No.154 of 2023 in OS.No.135 of 2023 passed by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Vikarabad, Vikarabad District. 2. Heard Sri Mohammed Iqbal Ali Javid, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Mohammed Ismail Khan, learned counsel for the respondent. 3. The appellants are defendants and respondent is plaintiff in the suit. For convenience, the parties will be hereinafter referred to as they are arrayed in the suit. 4. The brief factual matrix of the case, shorn-off unnecessary details, required for adjudication of the present case, is that the plaintiff filed suit in OS.No.135 of 2023 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Vikarabad, for perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. Along with the suit, an application in IA.No.154 of 2023 was filed for ad interim injunction. The trial Court vide order dated 20.03.2023 granted ad interim injunction till filing of counter by the defendants and posted the matter to 10.04.2023 and the said order was extended by trial Court from time to time, vide orders dated 29.12.2023 and 11.03.2024. The defendants on 02.04.2024, filed counter along with application vide IA.No.239 of 2024 to vacate the interim order and the said application is pending consideration. Aggrieved by the same, the present Appeal is filed. 5. Learned counsel for the revision petitioners/defendants submitted that their father- late Azeemuddin along with two others i.e., Mohd. Sajjad Hussaina and Khaja Shareef has purchased an extent of land admeasuring 408 square yards under registered sale deed bearing document No.934/1996 dated 04.05.1996 and constructed mosque in the name of Masjid-E-Arafath for use of muslim community. Learned counsel further submitted that in fact, after death of their father, they inherited the right and interest in Muthawalliship in the managing committee of Masjid-E-Arafath and Madarsa and that the plaintiff-society has no role in the affairs of the managing committee of Masjid-E-Arafath and Madarsa. Learned counsel further submitted that in fact, after death of their father, they inherited the right and interest in Muthawalliship in the managing committee of Masjid-E-Arafath and Madarsa and that the plaintiff-society has no role in the affairs of the managing committee of Masjid-E-Arafath and Madarsa. He further submitted that the plaintiff-respondent society was formed by few people who are unconnected with Madarsa and filed a suit by misrepresenting the facts and obtained injunction against the defendants and therefore, the defendants are being deprived of managing and offering prayers at the suit schedule property and in fact, the civil Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit. Learned counsel further contended that the trial Court despite filing counter and vacate stay petition is not adjudicating the said application, therefore, the present Appeal is filed to vacate the interim orders. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff contended that the respondent-society is a registered society and has purchased the suit schedule property in the name of three individuals, who are respectable elderly persons in the community and constructed a mosque by name Masjid-E-Arafath in the year 2002, by collecting donations and contributions from individuals, but the defendants are interfering with the affairs of the respondent-society by falsely claiming that they inherited the suit schedule property from their father. Learned counsel further submitted that several panchayats were held, however, the defendants are threatening the respondent-society therefore, suit was filed for perpetual injunction and the trial Court duly considering the merits of the case has granted ad interim injunction and in fact, there are no merits in the present Appeal and hence, the same is liable to be dismissed. 7. Perusal of record would disclose that the trial Court has granted ad interim injunction vide order dated 20.03.2023 till the date of filing of counter by the defendants. Admittedly, the defendants filed their counter on 02.04.2024 and they have also filed an application in IA.No.239 of 2024 seeking to vacate the interim order, however, it appears that the said application has not been adjudicated and the same is pending before the trial Court. 8. Admittedly, the defendants filed their counter on 02.04.2024 and they have also filed an application in IA.No.239 of 2024 seeking to vacate the interim order, however, it appears that the said application has not been adjudicated and the same is pending before the trial Court. 8. Defendant No.2 is claiming that he is Muthawalli of the mosque-cum-Madarsa and the plaintiff-society is formed by unconnected persons, whereas the plaintiff-society is claiming that the land was purchased by the society in the name of three individuals and a mosque has been constructed with the donations and contributions and that they are managing the affairs of the mosque-cum-madarsa, but the defendants are interfering with the affairs of the said mosque without any right or interest over the same. 9. In the light of the above, it is evident that there are disputed questions of fact with regard to ownership and possession over the suit schedule property and also as regards managing and officiating the affairs of the mosque-cum-madarsa. Therefore, in considered opinion of this Court, the matter requires detailed enquiry and the vacate petition filed by the defendants is also pending before the trial Court, without going into merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this Appeal with a direction to the trial Court to dispose of IA.No.239 of 2024 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, by duly affording opportunity of hearing to both the parties. 10. As a sequel, pending Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, shall stand closed. No costs.