ORDER
G.C. Garg, J.
1. Grant of an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure By the trial Court by its order dated May 10, 1991 in a suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent No. 1 seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendants from digging or lowering the level of the passage or putting any obstruction in the use thereof has given rise to the present revision petition.
2. Short submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the civil Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit and grant the prayer for amenities in respect of the tenanted premises. In other words, the contention is that the plaintiff ought to have filed a petition under the Rent Act. This contention has no merit in view of the judgement of this Court in Amar Singh v. Amrit Lal, (1988-2)94 P.L.R. 446.
3. Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that learned Additional District Judge has by granting the relief virtually decided the suit of the plaintiff-respondent No. 1. I again find no merit in the contention of the learned counsel. Learned Additional District Judge while disposing of the appeal has only prima facie come to the conclusion that the plaintiff was entitled to the grant of relief as prayed for by him in his application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Code. In any case, it is made clear that anything said in the orders of the Courts below shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the controversy raised in the suit pending between the parties.
4. With the above observations, this revision is dismissed being without any merit. The trial Court shall, however, make every effort to dispose of the suit at an early date. No costs.