In a matter under Article 227 arising from a suit pending since 2010 before a vacant court, the Hon'ble Court declined to issue immediate directions, advising the petitioner to seek such relief through an application to the Competent Court once the Judge is posted.
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. - 40
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4354 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ravindra Nath Agrawal Respondent :- The Acjm And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- R.V. Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- Diwakar Singh
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.
The sole prayer made in the instant petition is for issuing direction to the trial court to decide the Original Suit No.668 of 2010, expeditiously.
The suit is pending at the behest of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner admits that at present the court is lying vacant.
Consequently, at this stage this Court is not issuing any direction but leaves it open to the petitioner to make request for expeditious disposal of the proceedings by moving an appropriate application before the court below, soon after the Presiding Officer is posted in the court. In that event, the Presiding Officer shall proceed in the matter with a sense of expedition, having regard to the fact that the suit is of the year 2010.
The petition stands disposed of.
(Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.)
Order Date :- 22.7.2019 Atul
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should issue directions for expedited disposal of a pending civil suit.
Ravindra Nath Agrawal
The Acjm
Manoj Kumar Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
