Disposed

Ram Murti Maurya v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC9 May 2023WRIC/14602/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking direction for the expeditious disposal of Rest. App. No. 1284 of 2022 in the main case. The Court directed the Tehsildar to conclude proceedings within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Tehsildar, Tehsil Madhuban, District Mau, to conclude the proceedings of Rest. App. No. 1284 of 2022 within three months, with personal appearance allowed if lawyers fail to cooperate

Ram Murti Maurya Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:99149

¶2

Court No. - 52

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 14602 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Ram Murti Maurya Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dhirendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel representing the State-respondents.

¶7

This petition has been filed seeking expeditious disposal of Restoration Application No.1284 of 2022 (Computerized Case No. T202215510301284) (Moti Vs. Jashodiya) within a stipulated period.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pendency of the aforesaid case is causing serious prejudice to the rights of the petitioner and therefore this Court should issue a direction for expeditious disposal of the case.

¶9

Learned Standing Counsel has no serious objection to the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶10

In view of the above, having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the Tehsildar, Tehsil Madhuban, District Mau (respondent no.2) to conclude the proceedings of the aforesaid case expeditiously, preferably, within a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him, after giving full opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.

¶11

In case the lawyers do not cooperate with the proceedings either on account of abstainment from work or otherwise, the court concerned shall permit personal appearance of the parties to address it on the merits of the aforesaid case. However, the authority/court concerned shall take special care of the fact that the property rights of the parties may not be adversely affected only on account of non-cooperation of the lawyers and the aforesaid matter shall be disposed of strictly in accordance with law, taking care of the statutory provisions and after making critical analysis of the material available on record.

¶12

Order Date :- 9.5.2023 AKShukla/-

¶13

Digitally signed by :- ANIL KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ram Murti Maurya v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Murti Maurya v. State of U.P. and 4 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

Rajendra Patel Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Kripa Shankar Verma Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Adarsh Kumar Pandey and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Raja Chatar Pratap Singh and 2 Others Vs Commissioner Aligarh and 3 Others

Poonam Devi Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Krishnawati Devi and 3 Others Vs Additional Commissioner (Administration) Varanasi Division and 2 Others