Disposed

Kushum Rani Agrawal v. Vijay Krishna Agrawal

Allahabad HC17 Jul 2018TACL/56/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court declined to transfer a transfer application concerning a petition under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC to set aside an ex parte decree pending for 16 years. It directed the originating court to decide the petition expeditiously, with further transfer permissible if the decree is set aside.

What did the court decide?

Transfer application dismissed; direction to Court No. 13, Azamgarh to decide pending Order 9 Rule 13 CPC application within three weeks.

Kushum Rani Agrawal Vs Vijay Krishna Agrawal — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 9

¶2

Case :- TRANSFER APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 56 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Kushum Rani Agrawal Opposite Party :- Vijay Krishna Agrawal Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Kant Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶5

Office report dated 24.03.2018 based on a tracking report states that the notice of the transfer application has been delivered to the opposite party.

¶6

Despite notice, neither any appearance nor any counter affidavit has been filed by the opposite party.

¶7

By means of this transfer application, an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC filed by the applicant for setting aside the decree in suit no. 18 of 1989, is sought to be transferred from Azamgarh to Mau on the ground that the property in suit now falls within the District Mau.

¶8

The application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC has remained pending for almost 16 years now.

¶9

Under the circumstances, no useful purpose is going to be served by allowing the transfer application. In any case transfer of the proceedings is only likely to result in further delay in disposal of the application for setting aside the allegedly ex parte decree.

¶10

Under the circumstances, this transfer application is disposed of directing the Court concerned namely Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Court No. 13, Azamgarh to decide the pending application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC, registered as Misc. Application No. 101 of 2002, positively within a period of three weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is filed before it. In case necessity arise, the Court may deal with the application on a day to day basis.

¶11

In case the application is allowed and the ex parte decree is set aside, it shall be open for the applicant to file a fresh transfer application.

¶12

Subject to the above, this transfer application stands disposed of.

¶13

Order Date :- 17.7.2018 Mayank

¶14

KUMAR MISHRAANJANI Digitally signed by ANJANI KUMAR MISHRADN: C=IN, O=Personal, PostalCode=211001, S=Uttar Pradesh, Phone=f6e3ce979d8983acfc0b3ea049885bf64ad5bbb33050e3dfe3e210927d94f413, SERIALNUMBER=004ee64f25f9f36f85dbdc71f5b0ec1e2f0938431e25dbbadc93823915b36c6f, CN=ANJANI KUMAR MISHRAReason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2018-07-17 16:33:11

Kushum Rani Agrawal v. Vijay Krishna Agrawal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kushum Rani Agrawal v. Vijay Krishna Agrawal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Neha Agrawal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Hareram Singh and Another Vs Ram Dayal Singh and Another

Vijeta Gupta Vs Ashutosh Kumar

Aradhana Gupta Vs Principal Judge, Family Court and Another

Richa Singh Vs Principal Judge, Family Court and Another

Smt. Swapna Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another