Disposed

Motilal v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC11 Apr 2023WRIC/6750/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition sought expeditious disposal of a pending case causing prejudice to the petitioner. The court disposed of the petition by directing the concerned court to conclude proceedings within four months, permitting personal appearance if lawyers fail to cooperate.

What did the court decide?

Direction to conclude proceedings of the pending case expeditiously within four months; leave for personal appearance if lawyers fail to cooperate.

Motilal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6750 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Motilal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rahul Singh Dahiya,Anshul Pathak Counsel for Respondent :- CSC,Azad Rai

¶4

Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Rahul Singh Dahiya, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel representing the State-respondents and Shri Azad Rai, learned counsel for the respondent-Gaon Sabha.

¶6

This writ petition has been filed seeking expeditious disposal of Case No.138 of 2010 (Motilal v. Gaon Sabha Mohammadabad @ Gopalapur Pargana Sikandra, Tehsil Phoolpur, District- Allahabad & Ors.) within 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 off with a direction to the court concerned to conclude the proceedings of the aforesaid case expeditiously, preferably, within a period of four 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 :- 11.4.2023

¶12

Jyotsana

¶13

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

Motilal v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Motilal 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

Mahangu Vs Sub District Magistrate Tehsil - Shahganj District- Jaunpur and 4 Others

Smt. Bhagwati Devi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 12 Others

Smt. Kusum Devi Vs Sechan and 5 Others

Ram Khelawan Pal Vs State of U.P. and 20 Others

Markandey Rai Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Chinni and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others