Disposed

Rahetunnisha @ Seema Siddiqui v. Civil Judge Junior Division Lucknow and 2 Others

Allahabad HC14 Jul 2023/3480/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Nanavati Bench directed Civil Judge Junior Division Lucknow to decide an application for temporary injunction within six weeks. Notices were dispensed with, and the petition under Article 227 was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Opposite party 1 directed to decide temporary injunction application within six weeks; notices dispensed with.

Rahetunnisha @ Seema Siddiqui Vs Civil Judge Junior… — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:45707

¶2

Court No. - 20

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3480 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Rahetunnisha @ Seema Siddiqui Respondent :- Civil Judge Junior Division Lucknow And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Syed Waqar Husain,Salman Abbas

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for petitioner.

¶7

In view of order being proposed to be passed, notices to opposite parties stand dispensed with.

¶8

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed for expeditious disposal of application for temporary injunction filed in Regular Suit No.2804 of 2022 instituted by petitioner for cancellation of sale deed and permanent injunction. Prayer has also been made for direction for expeditious disposal of suit itself.

¶9

It has been submitted that there are two defendants in the suit out of which defendant no.1 has already put in appearance while defendant no.2 has not yet appeared but there is grave apprehension that nature of suit property would be changed during the course of proceedings and therefore expedite orders are required to be passed.

¶10

Considering submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioner, opposite party no.1 i.e. Civil Judge (Junior Division), Lucknow is directed to decide the pending application for temporary injunction in Regular Suit No.2804 of 2022; Afzal Ali & Anr. versus Qaisar Jaha & Anr. within a period of six weeks from the date office report regarding service upon defendant no.2 or his vakalatnama whichever is earlier is brought on record. In the meantime, trial court may consider grant of interim injunction in case plaintiff/petitioner is able to make out a case for same.

¶11

Benefit of this order shall be available only in case petitioner cooperates in early conclusion of the application/suit.

¶12

With the aforesaid direction, petition stands disposed of .

¶13

Order Date :- 14.7.2023 Subodh/-

¶14

Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rahetunnisha @ Seema Siddiqui v. Civil Judge Junior Division Lucknow and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahetunnisha @ Seema Siddiqui v. Civil Judge Junior Division Lucknow and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Thru. Manager Vs State of U.P. Thru. Spl. Secy. Institutional Finance and Ors.

Jageshwar Vs State of U.P. Thru Collector Rae Bareli and 2 Others

Saddam Vs Sub Divisional Magistrate Bilgram Dist. Hardoi and 2 Others

Muskan Gautam (in Habc 18798 of 2021) Thru. Her Father Sri Ram Babu Vs Station House Officer,P.S. Sarojaninagar,Lucknow and 6 Others

Hanuman Vs State of U.P. Thru. Distt. Magistrate, Raebareli and 7 Others

Uma Shanker Vs Upper Civil Judge (Junior Division) Room NO-17 Pratapgarh and 2 Others