Dismissed

Prem Kishan v. Smt. Vimla Devi and 3 Others

Allahabad HC25 Aug 2023A227/7581/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition under Article 227 sought a direction to the trial court to decide an application for enforcement of a temporary injunction regarding dispossession. The court held the petition was misconceived because the petitioner did not seek relief under Order 39 Rule 2A CPC for non-compliance with an injunction order. The petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The petition was dismissed along with costs of Rs. 1,000/-.

Prem Kishan Vs Smt. Vimla Devi and 3 Others — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:171704

¶2

Court No. - 1

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 7581 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Prem Kishan Respondent :- Smt. Vimla Devi And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Srivastava

¶5

Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Chandan Kumar Jaiswal, Advocate (Advocate Roll- A/C0122/2018) holding brief of Shri Pankaj Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶7

This petition has been filed seeking the following prayer:

¶8

"i. to direct the court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bareilly to decide application dated 22.02.2023 in Original Suit no. 423 of 2019 (Prem Kishan Versus Vimla Devi and other) pending before Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bareilly within stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court."

¶9

A perusal of the petition reveals that a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction was filed bearing Suit No. 423 of 2019 (Prem Kishan Vs. Vimla Devi and others). It is stated that an application 6C was filed seeking temporary injunction. It appears that an order dated 5.10.2021 was passed on the application directing maintenance of status quo. It is stated that despite that order, the respondents are forcibly wanting to dispossess the petitioner along with his family. An FIR has also been filed by the petitioners. It is stated that since the police was not taking any action against the respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3, the petitioner moved an application before the Civil Judge on 22.2.2023. In this petition, a direction has been sought to decide the aforesaid application dated 22.2.2023. A perusal of the application dated 22.2.2023, a certified copy of which has been filed as annexure no. 6 to this petition, reveals that an allegation has been made therein that the order of the trial court dated 5.10.2021 is being flouted and a direction has been sought to the local police and also to other administrative and executive authorities for enforcement of the order dated 5.10.2021.

¶10

Where an order of temporary injunction is not being complied with, a motion has to be made under Order 39 Rule 2A of the CPC. No such direction as contemplated in Order 39 Rule 2A of the CPC has been sought in the said application of 22.02.2023.

¶11

This petition is misconceived and is, therefore, dismissed with cost of Rs. 1,000/- which shall be deposited with the Allahabad High Court Legal Services Authorities within a period of one week from today.

¶12

Registrar Compliance is directed to communicate this order to the court concerned within a period of 15 days.

¶13

Order Date :- 25.8.2023 A. V. Singh

¶14

(Jayant Banerji, J.)

¶15

Digitally signed by :- AJAY VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Prem Kishan v. Smt. Vimla Devi and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prem Kishan v. Smt. Vimla Devi and 3 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

Akhilesh Kumar Singh Vs Gyanti Singh and 6 Others

Kinsraj (Deceased) and 5 Others Vs Jagdev (Deceased) and 4 Others

Heeralal Gupta Vs Girja and 3 Others

Chandrika Vs Nar Singh

Smt. Azeezan and 6 Others Vs Smt. Khushnood and 22 Others

Jawahar Lal Vs Lal Ji and 2 Others