Disposed

Manish Kumar Gupta v. Civil Judge Faizabad and Others

Allahabad HC10 Jun 2022/2125/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition under Article 227 sought expedited disposal of a pending temporary injunction application and status quo. The Court directed the Civil Judge to decide the application within two weeks without issuing notices, citing potential prejudice from ongoing demolition.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Civil Judge to dispose of the temporary injunction application within two weeks and dispensed with issuing notices to the opposite parties.

Manish Kumar Gupta Vs Civil Judge Faizabad… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 2

¶2

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2125 of 2022 Petitioner :- Manish Kumar Gupta Respondent :- Civil Judge Faizabad And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Onkar Nath Tiwari,Amrendra Nath Tripathi

¶3

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Amrendra Nath Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶5

In view of the order proposed to be passed, the notices to opposite parties are hereby dispensed with as no prejudice is being caused to them by this order.

¶6

By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:-

¶7

"I. to issue an order, direction to expedite application for temporary injunction filed in Civil Suit No.1183 of 2021 (Manish Kumar Gupta vs. Rahul Gupta & others), expeditiously within stipulated period and further parties may kindly be directed to maintain status-quo over the suit property during pendency of this petition as well as application for temporary injunction in the ends of justice."

¶8

Sri Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the aforesaid application of the petitioner is pending consideration since 08.10.2021 but the same could not be disposed of till date and presently the private respondents are demolishing such building in the month of June, 2022, as in the month of June no civil cases are normally taken up in the Civil Court. The relevant photographs of demolishing have been shown to the Court.

¶9

At this stage, without issuing any notice to the private respondents it cannot be ascertained as to who is demolishing the building in question. The fact remains that if any interim injunction application is pending consideration since October, 2021, the same should have been disposed of with expedition, strictly in accordance with law.

¶10

Therefore, without entering into merits of the issue, I hereby direct the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Haveli, DistrictFaizabad to dispose of the temporary injunction application of the petitioner filed in Civil Suit No.1183 of 2021 (Manish Kumar Gupta vs. Rahul Gupta & others), expeditiously preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of

¶11

production of a certified copy of this order, strictly in accordance with law, by affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.

¶12

The appropriate application shall be filed by the petitioner before the learned District & Sessions Judge, Faizabad as well as before the learned court concerned so that such application could be disposed of within the time stipulated.

¶13

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of finally.

¶14

Order Date :- 10.6.2022 [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Suresh/

¶15

Digitally signed by SURESH CHANDRA Date: 2022.06.10 19:06:45 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Manish Kumar Gupta v. Civil Judge Faizabad and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish Kumar Gupta v. Civil Judge Faizabad and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shatrughan and 6 Others Vs Civil Judge J.D. Sadar Faizabad and 2 Others

Ram Bharat Yadav Vs State of U.P.Thru. Addl. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 5 Others

Neeraj Chaturvedi Vs Central Bank of India, Human Resource Deptt. Thru.General Manager and 2 Others

Mukesh Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Irrigation and Water Resources and 2 Others

Smt. Babita Kumari Alias Babita Kumari Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru Addl Chief Secy Basic Education Lko. and 5 Others

Sarita Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. /Addl Chief Secy. Medical and Health Deptt. and Another