Dismissed

Abdul Rasheed v. Govind Prasad Alias Bachcha and 2 Others

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2021A227/7077/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A bench held that a direction cannot be issued to a subordinate civil court to decide a suit within a fixed period under Article 227. Relying on a Division Bench precedent, the court declined the prayer for early disposal of a rent case and dismissed the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for direction to decide Rent Case No. 173 of 2016 within a fixed period was declined.

Abdul Rasheed Vs Govind Prasad Alias… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 4

¶2

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 7077 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Abdul Rasheed Respondent :- Govind Prasad Alias Bachcha And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Iqbal Ahmad

¶4

Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶5

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

¶6

"(i) an order or direction of suitable nature, directing the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)/Prescribed Authority, Kanpur Nagar to decide the Rent Case No. 173 of 2016, (Abdul Raseed and another Vs. Govind Prasad and others) under Section 21(1)(b) of U.P. Rent Act No 13 of 1972 within short fixed by this Hon'ble Court."

¶7

From the perusal of the record, it transpires that the prayer has been made for early disposal of Rent Case No. 173 of 2016, (Abdul Raseed and another Vs. Govind Prasad and others) pending in the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division)/Prescribed Authority, Kanpur Nagar.

¶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 :- 2.12.2021 V.S.Singh

Abdul Rasheed v. Govind Prasad Alias Bachcha and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Rasheed v. Govind Prasad Alias Bachcha 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

Shalini Vs Durgesh Mishra

Ms. Nagina Siddiqui Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Totaram Vs Smt. Nemwati Devi and 6 Others

Om Sharan Sahu Vs Dwarka Prasad

Santosh Kumar Shukla Vs Narendra Kumar Tiwari

Pawan Kumar Gupta Vs Indra Kumar Jaiswal