Allowed

Malti Devi v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC17 Mar 2023WRIC/5714/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court disposed of a writ petition seeking expedited disposal of a pending dispute regarding property rights. The petition was allowed with a direction to conclude proceedings within five months and permit personal appearance if lawyers fail to cooperate.

What did the court decide?

Direction to conclude proceedings expeditiously within five months and permit personal appearance if lawyers fail to cooperate.

Malti Devi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5714 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Malti Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Raj Prajapati,Jay Prakash Narayan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Jay Prakash Narayan, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel representing the State-respondents.

¶6

This petition has been filed seeking expeditious disposal of Case No.3118 of 2022 (Computerized Case No. T202214360503118) (Malti Devi Vs. Bagesara Devi) within a stipulated period.

¶7

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.

¶8

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

¶9

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 Karekat, District Jaunpur (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.

¶10

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.

¶11

Order Date :- 17.3.2023 AKShukla/-

¶12

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

Malti Devi v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Malti Devi v. State of U.P. and 2 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

Smt. Indrawati Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Har Dev Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Hari Saran Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Ashraf Ali Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Rama Devi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Indra Dev Nishad Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others