Allowed

Hari Lal v. Raj Karan

Allahabad HC4 Dec 2023A227/10517/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a writ petition under Article 227 seeking to expedite a pending injunction application. The High Court directed the subordinate court to dispose of the application strictly in accordance with the mandatory circular requiring a six-month time limit for such decisions.

What did the court decide?

The court directed the concerned court to decis upon the pending injunction application strictly in accordance with the circular dated 16.8.2017.

Hari Lal Vs Raj Karan — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:229105

¶2

Court No. - 4

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 10517 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Hari Lal Respondent :- Raj Karan Counsel for Petitioner :- Amit Kumar Malviya,Yogesh Mishra

¶5

Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

¶7

The only prayer made by the petitioner in the present petition to direct the Court below to decide the injunction application being Paper No.6-C filed in Original Suit No.583 of 2022 ( Hari Lal Vs. Raj Karan) expeditiously.

¶8

In view of the order proposed to be passed herein, no useful purpose would be served by putting the opposite party to notice and keeping this petition pending before this Court. However, in case the opposite party feels aggrieved by the order his/her right to seek modification/variation of the order is being kept reserved.

¶9

It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the injunction is urgently required and considerable time has already been lapsed but till date the same is still pending.

¶10

This Court has already directed all the subordinate courts to ensure disposal of interim injunction applications within six months failing which, they shall have to record reasons. The said direction was issued by the letter dated 16.8.2017 bearing No.CL No.24/Admn. G-II, dated Allahabad 16.8.2017 and same is quoted below:-

¶11

"From,

¶12

Mohd.Faiz Alam Khan, HJS,

¶13

Registrar General,

¶14

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

¶15

To,

¶16

All the District & Sessions Judges,Subordinate to the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad.

¶17

C.L. No. 24/Admin. 'G-II' Dated: Allahabad 16.08.17

¶18

Sub: Time bound disposal of interim injunction application.

¶19

Madam/Sir,

¶20

Hon'ble Court has directed that all the subordinate courts must ensure to dispose of applications of interim injunction within six months, failing which they shall have to record reasons in the order-sheet. I am, therefore, directed to request you to circulate the instant direction amongst all the judicial Officers working under your supervision and control and to ensure strict compliance of the same in letter and spirit. Your faithfully,

¶21

(Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan)

¶22

No. 9770/Admin. 'G-II' Dated: Allahabad 16.08.2017"

¶23

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is disposed of directing the court concerned to decide the aforesaid injunction application strictly in accordance with the circular No.CL No.24/Admn. G-II, dated Allahabad dated 16.8.2017.

¶24

Order Date :- 4.12.2023 Pramod Tripathi

¶25

Digitally signed by :- PRAMOD TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Hari Lal v. Raj Karan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hari Lal v. Raj Karan

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

Smt. Kalawati Devi Vs Tej Pratap Singh and 4 Others

Nilam Devi Vs Urmila Singh and 6 Others

Raj Kumar and 2 Others Vs M/S Unitech Limited

Nandlal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Trigunanand Tripathi Vs Pralahad and 3 Others

In Matter of Mayapuri Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd. Vs U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad