Disposed

Naimuddin @ Bablu v. Dwarika Prasad Shivhare and 3 Others

Allahabad HC23 Jan 2023A227/454/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition under Article 227 directing the trial court to expedite Case No. 80 of 2003. It set specific time limits for plaintiff and defendant evidence and committed the matter for final disposal after evidence closure.

What did the court decide?

Direction to trial court to conclude evidence within stipulated time frames and dispose of suit expeditiously within six months.

Naimuddin @ Bablu Vs Dwarika Prasad… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 37

¶2

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 454 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Naimuddin @ Bablu Respondent :- Dwarika Prasad Shivhare And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajeev Kumar Sharma

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the defendant/ petitioner.

¶6

By means of this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution, petitioner wants expeditious disposal of Case No. 80 of 2003, Dwarika vs. Jamil pending in the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Hamirpur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that written statement has been filed and the issues have been framed, even issue no. 5 was decided way back on 29.08.2009.

¶8

In view of above, since the suit is of the year 2003, this petition stands disposed of with a direction to the trial court to ensure that the plaintiffs' conclude their evidence within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order and defendants in the suit do cooperate in conclusion of evidence of the plaintiffs. After the plaintiffs' evidence is concluded, the defendants shall be granted three months' further time to conclude evidence and the plaintiff shall also cooperate in conclusion of their evidence within the time stipulated herein above. After the conclusion of evidence of both the parties to the suit the trial court will proceed to to decide the matter as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six months in the order of other pending suits already expedited by this Court.

¶9

It is clarified that in the event, this order could not be carried out within the time frame fixed for any technical reason, then for such delay in disposal of the aforesaid case, and pendency thereof itself shall ordinarily not be a ground sufficient enough to fasten the authority concerned with personal liability of contempt but the Court shall have to record reasons to be justified enough for granting adjournments and/ or deferring hearing of the matter by fixing dates.

¶10

Order Date :- 23.1.2023 IrfanUddin

¶11

Digitally signed by :- IRFAN UDDIN SIDDIKI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Naimuddin @ Bablu v. Dwarika Prasad Shivhare and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naimuddin @ Bablu v. Dwarika Prasad Shivhare and 3 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

Ram Das Vs Smt. Shakuntala Devi and Anotaher

Arshad Warsi Vs Nagar Palika Parishad and 2 Others

Shubhawati Devi and Another Vs Pawan Kumar Singh and Another

Ram Nivas and Another Vs State of U P and 5 Others

Amar Chandra @ Bau Vs Urmila Devi and Another

Balkishun Vs Ramjeet and 6 Others