Dismissed

Lakshmi Shankar Tripathi v. Nanak Chandra

Allahabad HC23 Nov 2021A227/6619/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed under Article 227 seeking a direction for the expeditious disposal of a pending civil suit. Following a Division Bench precedent, the Court held that it cannot issue such directions, leaving urgency to the discretion of the trial judge.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's prayer for direction commanding the Civil Judge to decide the suit expeditiously was declined.

Lakshmi Shankar Tripathi Vs Nanak Chandra — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 4

¶2

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6619 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Lakshmi Shankar Tripathi Respondent :- Nanak Chandra Counsel for Petitioner :- Sangam Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶5

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

¶6

"(i) issue an appropriate order or direction commanding the prescribed authority/ Civil Judge (Senior Division) Etawah to decide the P.A. Suit No. 02 of 2015 (Lakshmi Shankar Vs Nanak Chandra) pending in the Court of Prescribed Authority/ Civil Judge (Senior Division) Etawah, expeditiously within the time frame as stipulated by this Hon'ble Court."

¶7

From the perusal of the record, it transpires that the prayer has been made for early disposal of P.A. Suit No. 02 of 2015 (Lakshmi Shankar Vs Nanak Chandra) pending in the Court of Prescribed Authority/ Civil Judge (Senior Division) Etawah.

¶8

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:-

¶9

"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.

¶10

Ultimately, it must be left to the judicious exercise of discretion of the concerned Court to determine whether a ground for urgency has been

¶11

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 :- 23.11.2021 V.S.Singh

Lakshmi Shankar Tripathi v. Nanak Chandra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lakshmi Shankar Tripathi v. Nanak Chandra

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

Shri Ramesh Kumar Jaggi Vs Sri Gulab Chandra Agarwal

Ashok Kumar Verma Vs Madan Mohan Agarwal and 11 Others

Shabbir Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and 10 Others

Smt.Kiran Devi and 4 Others Vs Anil Kumar and Another

Shashiklala Vs Raj Kumar and 2 Others

Shri Thakur Ji Maharaj Virajman Mandir Vs Rama Mister and 6 Others