Held that a writ petition regarding a private property dispute will not be entertained when an original suit has already been instituted. However, if a temporary injunction order was not complied with, the petitioner may proceed under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of CPC. Writ petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 39
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 10769 of 2018
Petitioner :- Sohan Lal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 10 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sharad Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Dilip Gupta,J. Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
The dispute in the present writ petition apparently appears to be a dispute between the petitioner and private respondent nos. 8, 9, 10 and 11. It also transpires that the petitioner has filed Original Suit No. 995 of 2017 before the Civil Judge (JD), Kaushambi in which private respondents have also impleaded as defendants.
It will not be appropriate for the Court to entertain a petition relating to a private dispute of property, more particularly when a suit has already been instituted.
However, if the temporary injunction order has not been complied with, the petitioner, if so advised, may take steps under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 9.4.2018 Arvind
(Dilip Gupta, J.)
(Neeraj Tiwari, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Court should entertain a writ petition in a private property dispute where an original suit has already been instituted.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sohan Lal
State Of U.P.
Dilip Gupta
Neeraj Tiwari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
