Disposed

Ramesh and Another v. Balbir Singh @ Balloo and Another

Allahabad HC5 Sept 2022A227/5927/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court in a writ petition directed the Upper Civil Judge, Court No. 5, District Agra to decide the disputed original suit expeditiously within one year, preventing unnecessary adjournments and maintaining the status quo.

What did the court decide?

Direction to decide the suit within one year; maintenance of status quo; imposition of cost for unnecessary adjournments.

Ramesh and Another Vs Balbir Singh @ Balloo and Another — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5927 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Ramesh And Another Respondent :- Balbir Singh @ Balloo And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Om Prakash Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Madhav Jain

¶4

Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents.

¶6

No notice be issued to the private respondents taking into consideration the nature of the order proposed to be passed.

¶7

The petitioner before this Court is seeking a direction to the Upper Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 5, District Agra to decide Original Suit No. 902 of 2013 within stipulated period of time.

¶8

After hearing the parties at length, the parties agreed that the Original Suit No. 902 of 2013 be decided expeditiously within a time frame fixed by this Court.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue, the present petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to the concerned court below to consider and decide the aforesaid case in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within a period of one year from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, but certainly after giving opportunity to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties, if there is no legal impediment.

¶10

It is made clear that no unnecessary adjournments shall be granted to either of the parties and in case any unnecessary adjournment is sought on behalf of the parties, same shall be granted after imposing cost of Rs. 500/- per adjournment upon the party concerned with direction to deposit the same by the next date fixed.

¶11

It is submitted that the petitioners claim their right over the property in dispute on the basis of sale deed dated 05.08.1992; whereas, the defendants - respondents claim their right over the property in dispute on the basis of the allotment made vide resolution dated 20.06.1990, which was approved by the Sub Divisional Officer, Kirawali on 28.07.1990.

¶12

In view of the above, the parties shall maintain status quo as on date over the property in dispute till the decision of the aforesaid suit.

¶13

Order Date :- 5.9.2022/VPS

¶14

Digitally signed by VED PRAKASH SHARMA Date: 2022.09.06 16:26:14 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramesh and Another v. Balbir Singh @ Balloo and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh and Another v. Balbir Singh @ Balloo and Another

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

Smt. Ujala Gupta and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shri Sewa Singh and 4 Others Vs Rajjo Devi and 3 Others

Nagendra Kumar Vs Kanaklata @ Rinku

Smt. Lalmuni Devi Vs Brijbhan and 3 Others

Rukhsar Bi and Another Vs State of U P and 9 Others

Ran Singh Nagar and 4 Others Vs Lokesh Nagar and Another