Disposed

Chandra Mohan Mishra v. Gulab Chandra and Another

Allahabad HC1 Dec 2020A227/1154/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 227, the single judge declined to interfere with the impugned order of the Additional District Judge rejecting an application under Order XXXXI Rule 19 CPC. The court directed the lower court to dispose of the pending application in time.

What did the court decide?

Preliminary tilt to dispose pending application within time; no order made on merits due to strict instructions not to interfere in orders of subordinate court.

Chandra Mohan Mishra Vs Gulab Chandra and Another — Corruption | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1154 of 2020 Petitioner :- Chandra Mohan Mishra Respondent :- Gulab Chandra And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Gautam,Rajesh Kumar Mall

¶3

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶5

In view of the order, which is proposed to be passed today, notices need not go to the private respondents.

¶6

Chandra Mohan Mishra is before this Court assailing the judgement and order dated 13.12.2019 and the decree dated 20.12.2019 passed by learned Additional District Judge/Special Judge, Prevention of Corruption Act (U.P.S.E.B.), Gorakhpur in Misc. Civil Case No.836 of 2018 (Chandra Mohan Mishra vs. Gulab Chandra and another) in Misc. Case No.25 of 2014 arising out of Civil Appeal No.28 of 2010, rejecting the Application 4-C under Order 41 Rule 19 read with Section 151 C.P.C. filed by the petitioner.

¶7

The Court has proceeded to examine the record in question and finds that the Court below has recorded categorical findings of fact and unless these findings are shown perverse or contrary to record resulting in grave injustice to petitioner, in writ jurisdiction under Article 227, this Court exercising restricted and narrow jurisdiction would not be justified in interfering with the same. In supervisory jurisdiction of this Court over subordinate Courts, the scope of judicial review is very limited and narrow. It is not to correct the errors in the orders of the court below but to remove manifest and patent errors of law and jurisdiction without acting as an appellate authority. The Court finds no justification warranting interference with the orders impugned in this writ petition.

¶8

Once the Court has declined to interfere with the impugned orders, then learned counsel for the petitioner prays that a direction be issued to the court below to decide the aforesaid Misc. Case No.25/2014 within stipulated time.

¶9

In the facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this petition stands disposed of with observation that in case the petitioner moves an appropriate application strictly in accordance with law under Order XXXXI Rule 19 read with Section 151 CPC in the aforesaid misc. case, the Appellate Court would proceed to decide the same on the

¶10

merits of the case, after giving opportunity of hearing to all the state holders in the matter.

¶11

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicants alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.

¶12

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶13

Order Date :- 1.12.2020

¶14

RKP

Chandra Mohan Mishra v. Gulab Chandra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandra Mohan Mishra v. Gulab Chandra and Another

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

Ghanshyam Prasad Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Smt. Chandni Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and 15 Others

Suneel and 3 Others Vs Civil Judge (Junior Division) and 5 Others

Babu Singh Vs Jitendra Singh @ Guddan Singh and Another

Rajendra Kumar Vs Jhabbu Ram, Executive Engineer Vidyut Vitram Khand and Another

Sarfaraz Vs District Judge Meerut and 4 Others