Disposed

Jagdish and Another v. U.P. Ziladhikari and 10 Others

Allahabad HC18 Jan 2019WRIC/832/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The high court disposed of a writ petition seeking early disposal of a recall application pending before a civil court. The court observed that pending proceedings should conclude within a reasonable time if parties do not seek unnecessary adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Dismissal of writ petition with observation that the court below should conclude proceedings within reasonable time.

Jagdish and Another Vs U.P. Ziladhikari and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 20

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 832 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Jagdish And Another Respondent :- U.P. Ziladhikari And 10 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Upadhyay,Kamlesh Kumar Tiwari

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Kamlesh Kumar Tiwari, Advocate assisted by Sri Sanjay Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Pradeep Kumar Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent no.1.

¶7

By means of the present writ petition, the petitioners have made a prayer for an early disposal of Recall Application No.27/123 of 2010 in Case No.652 of 1981 (Dev Narain and others Vs. Ravindra Nath & Ors.) said to have been filed on 16.04.2010 pending before respondent no.1/Up Ziladhikari, Tehsil Sadar, District Azamgarh for recalling an order dated 13.01.1982 passed under Section 229B of UP ZA & LR Act,1950.

¶8

Learned Standing Counsel points out that the application for recall has been filed by the petitioners in the year 2010 for recalling of the order passed in the year 1982, as such, the recall application is highly time barred. However, the learned Standing Counsel does not object to the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the court below may proceed to dispose of the application at an early date.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners would appear before the court below in the pending matter and would not seek any unnecessary adjournment.

¶10

With the consent of the parties the writ petition is disposed of with an observation that in case the petitioners appear before the court below and do not seek any unnecessary adjournment it is expected that the court below would make an endeavour to conclude the pending proceedings in accordance with law within a reasonable time period after due notice and opportunity to the parties concerned.

¶11

Order Date :- 18.1.2019 Pratima

¶12

(Dr. Y.K.Srivastava,J.)

Jagdish and Another v. U.P. Ziladhikari and 10 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagdish and Another v. U.P. Ziladhikari and 10 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. Vs P.O. Industrial Tribunal-Iii and Another

Indu Devi Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Mewa Lal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Than Singh and Another Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Naveen Kumar Dagar Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Gorakhnath Singh Vs Sub Divisional Magistrate and 10 Others