Dismissed

Avnish Kumar v. Civil Judge, (Junior Division) and 2 Others

Allahabad HC9 Jul 2021A227/2988/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge dismissed the writ petition under Article 227 seeking a direction to expedite the disposal of a pending civil suit. Relying on a Division Bench precedent prohibiting such directions to subordinate courts, the court declined to grant the relief and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The request to issue a direction for early disposal of the civil suit was not granted.

Avnish Kumar Vs Civil Judge, (Junior… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2988 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Avnish Kumar Respondent :- Civil Judge, (Junior Division) And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Girraj Singh Counsel for Respondent :- R.V. Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Girraj Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.V.Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents no.2 and 3.

¶6

This writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:-

¶7

"issue a order or direction, directing Civil Judge, (Junior Division), Firozabad to consider and decide the Suit No. 175 of 2018 (Avnish Kumar Vs. Bank of India and another) within stipulated period at an early date as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court."

¶8

From the perusal of the record, it transpires that the prayer has been made for early disposal of Suit No. 175 of 2018 pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Firozabad.

¶9

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 suit within stipulated period. Relevant portion of the judgment is extracted hereasunder:-

¶10

"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.

¶11

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.

¶12

For these reasons, we are not inclined to entertain the petition. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to cost."

¶13

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.

¶14

The writ petitions is dismissed .

¶15

Order Date :- 9.7.2021 Kushal

Avnish Kumar v. Civil Judge, (Junior Division) and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avnish Kumar v. Civil Judge, (Junior Division) and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sushma Matroja and Another Vs Children Paradise Academy School and Another

Arvind Kumar Vs Smt.Archana

Durga Prasad Sharma Vs Nagarpalika Parishad and Another

Smt. Poonam Tiwari Vs Gorakhpur Development Authority Gorakhpur

Himanshu Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Nanu Alias Mamchand Vs Ajay and 6 Others