Disposed

Mohd. Aslam Jamal Khan v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC5 Apr 2023WRIC/8723/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judge order disposed of a writ petition seeking expeditious disposal of a pending case. The High Court directed the Naib Tehsildar to conclude proceedings within four months, permitting personal appearance if lawyers fail to cooperate.

What did the court decide?

Direction to conclude proceedings within four months; permit personal appearance if lawyers fail to cooperate.

Mohd. Aslam Jamal Khan Vs State of U.P. and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8723 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Mohd. Aslam Jamal Khan Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Lal Chandra Yadav,Kamlesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Lal Chandra Yadav, 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.3774 of 2021 (Computerized Case No. T202115510403774) (Mohd. Aslam Jamal Khan Vs. Dharmendra Yadav) 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 Naib Tehsildar, Mohammadabad Gohna, Mau (respondent no.2) 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 :- 5.4.2023 AKShukla/-

¶12

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

Mohd. Aslam Jamal Khan v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Aslam Jamal Khan 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

Samim Bano Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Kalimum Nisha Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Raj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 10 Others

Jhuri Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shyam Lal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Udal Singh Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others