Disposed

Rakesh Bind v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC18 May 2023WRIC/16902/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought expeditious disposal of a pending mutation case alleging prejudice due to delay. The Allahabad High Court directed the authorities to conclude proceedings within five months, emphasizing personal appearance if lawyers are non-cooperative to safeguard property rights.

What did the court decide?

Direction to conclude mutation proceedings expeditiously within five months, permitting personal appearance if lawyers fail to cooperate.

Rakesh Bind Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:108308

¶2

Court No. - 52

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 16902 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Rakesh Bind Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kirt Raj Yadav 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 Mutation Case No.2379 of 2019 (Computerized Case No. T201915060802379) (Rakesh Bind Vs. Sukiya) 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 Naib Tehsildar, Tehsil Marteenganj, District Azamgarh (respondent no.2) to conclude the proceedings of the aforesaid case expeditiously, preferably, within a period of five 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 :- 18.5.2023 AKShukla/-

¶13

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

Rakesh Bind v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Bind v. State of U.P. 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

Babu Singh @ Guddu Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ram Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Jitendra Sagar @ Jitendra Kumar Sagar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vinod Kushwaha and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Janak Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Fatehmuhammd and Another Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others