Petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 227 seeking a direction to the District Judge to expedite a delayed civil appeal. The Single Judge declined the prayer, relying on a recent Division Bench decision holding that High Courts cannot issue such directions under Article 227.
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. - 1
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2940 of 2021 Petitioner :- Bijendra Pal Singh Respondent :- Chandralok Gramin Sahkari Awas Limited And Another
Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamlendra Singh Jadaun
Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
Heard Sri Kamlendra Singh Jadaun, learned counsel for the petitioner.
This writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:-
" i) direct the Additional District Judge, IXth, Firozabad to decide the Civil Appeal No. 317 of 2018, Bijendra Pal Singh vs. Chandralok Gramin Sahkari Awas Limited and another along with delay condonation application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act expeditiously, within sitpulated period as directed by this Hon'ble Court."
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent no. 1 filed Original Suit No. 138 of 1990 against the petitioner. The said suit was decreed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Firozabad on 02.11.2006. A civil appeal was preferred by the petitioner after lapse of 12 years before the District Judge, Firozabad being Civil Appeal No. 317 of 2018 along with an application for condonation of delay. A prayer has been made for early disposal of the said appeal pending before the District Judge, Firozabad on the ground that the petitioner is an old person.
When the Court inquired from learned counsel for the petitioner about the reason for delay in filing the appeal, the counsel could not respond to the said query nor could lay application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act along
with civil appeal.
The Division Bench of this Court in case of Ali Shad Usmani vs. Ali Isteba, 2015 (2) ADJ 250 (DB) has held that no direction can be issued to the sub-ordinate courts for deciding the civil suit within stipulated period. Relevant portion of the judgment is extracted hereasunder:-
"We are not inclined to issue a direction for the expeditious hearing of a Civil Suit which is pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), District-Azamgarh. It would be most inappropriate to Court to entertain a writ petition under Article 226 and/or under Article 227 of the Constitution simply for the purpose of expediting the hearing of a suit. Such orders, if granted, place a class of litigants, who move the court in a separate and preferential category whereas other cases which may be of similar or greater antiquity and urgency are left to be decided in the normal channel. Hence, any such direction may be issued with the greatest care and circumspection by the High Court otherwise the Civil Courts will be overburdened only with requests for expeditious disposal of suits, which have been expedited by the High Court. Most of the litigants cannot afford the expense of moving the High court and would not, therefore, be in a position to have the benefit of such an order.
Ultimately, it must be left to the judicious exercise of discretion of the concerned Court to determine whether a ground for urgency has been made out. We emphasize that there may be other cases such as involving senior citizens, those who are differently abled or people suffering from a particular disablilty socio-economic or otherwise which may prime cause of urgent disposal. It is for the learned Trial Judge in each case to apply his or her mind and decide whether the hearing of the suit to be expedited.
For these reasons, we are not inclined to entertain the petition. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to cost."
In view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Ali Shad Usmani (supra), this Court declines to grant the relief as prayed for.
The writ petitions is dismissed.
Order Date :- 8.7.2021 V.S.Singh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can issue a direction to the subordinate court to expedite the hearing of a civil appeal under Article 227.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Ali Shad Usmani vs. Ali IstebaRelied on¶11
Ali Shad Usmani vs. Ali Isteba, 2015 (2) ADJ 250 (DB)
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Bijendra Pal Singh
Chandralok Gramin Sahkari Awas Limited
Another
Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
