Disposed

Smt. Sangeeta Pandey and Another v. Appellate Appointed Authority/Chief Judicial Magistrate,Gonda and 4 Others

Allahabad HC5 Apr 2024/1086/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226/227, the Allahabad High Court directed the appellate authority (ACJM, Gonda) to decide a pending mutation appeal filed by petitioners (co-parceners) regarding an ancestral property within two months. The court directed this to ensure expeditious disposal despite pending civil suits on title.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to the appellate authority to decide the pending Nagar Palika Appeal No. 3 of 2020 regarding mutation within two months, subject to petitioners' cooperation.

Smt. Sangeeta Pandey and Another Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:28047

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1086 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Smt. Sangeeta Pandey And Another Respondent :- Appellate Appointed Authority/Chief Judicial Magistrate,Gonda And 4 Others

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Shashank Shukla,Prachi Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- Indrajeet Shukla

¶6

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶7

Heard Shri Shashank Shukla, learned counsel appearing for petitioners, Shri Indrajeet Shukla, learned counsel appearing for Nagar Palika Parishad and perused the material available on record.

¶8

Considering the fact that the prayer has been made by the petition for expeditious disposal of the appeal, the notices to private respondent is dispensed with.

¶9

It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioners that the dispute in the present case pertains to the house No. 587 (Old House No. 457/500/1575), which has been sold by the father of the petitioners. It has been further submitted that the aforesaid house is the ancestral property and as per Mitakshara Law, the petitioners have a right over the said property by birth and accordingly, the petitioner could not have sold the property to the exclusion of the petitioners, who are co-parceners of the said property. It is in this regard the petitioners have filed suit for cancellation of the sale deed before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Gonda, which has been registered as Suit No. 3254 of 2020, which is pending consideration.

¶10

On the other hand, the petitioners have also moved an application before the Nagar Palilka Parishad Nawabganj, District Gonda for recording their names against the aforesaid

¶11

property on the basis of the fact that they are co-parceners in the said property. The Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Nawabganj, District Gonda had passed an order dated 26.09.2020 only detailing the relevant statutory provision and the petitioners considering that their application have been rejected, had filed an appeal against the order dated 26.09.2020 before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gonda. The Nagar Palilka Appeal No. 3 of 2020, which is pending consideration and it is in this regard that a prayer has been made for a direction for expeditious disposal of the said appeal.

¶12

Learned counsel for respondent on the other hand has vehemently submitted that a suit has also been filed by the petitioners for declaration which is pending and the entire controversy can be settled once and for all. In case the petitioners is declared to be owner of the said property, suitable order can be passed by the Nagar Palika Parishad, Gonda in compliance of said order.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioners on the hand hand, has insisted that irrespective of the suit proceedings, the petitioners have a right for mutation of his name against the said property, therefore, the appellate authority should be directed to decide his appeal expeditiously.

¶14

From perusal of the aforesaid order dated 26.09.2020, it is evident that the Executive Oficer has not taken any decision either to accept the application preferred by the petitioners or to reject the same but treating the said application to be an order of rejection, an appeal has been filed.

¶15

In view of the matter, the appeal pending since 2020 deserves to be decided expeditiously in accordance with law and accordingly, the appellate authority is directed to decide the said appeal expeditiously say within a period of two months from

¶16

the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him in accordance with law, in case there is no other legal impediment.

¶17

The petitioners undertake to cooperate in the proceeding before the appellate authority and shall appear on all the date fixed.

¶18

It is made clear that the direction of this Court are subject to cooperation of the petitioners before the appellate authority and benefit of this order shall not be available in case he violates the terms and conditions as stated here-in-above.

¶19

With the aforesaid observations/directions, this petition is disposed of.

¶20

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶21

Order Date :- 5.4.2024 Virendra

¶22

Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt. Sangeeta Pandey and Another v. Appellate Appointed Authority/Chief Judicial Magistrate,Gonda and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Sangeeta Pandey and Another v. Appellate Appointed Authority/Chief Judicial Magistrate,Gonda 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Darrshan Singh Vs Bhoodan Yogna Samiti Kheri .

Vinod Kumar Shukla and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Poonam Devi Vs Civil Judge (J.D.) Kadipur, Sultanpur and Others

Nanhu vs Civil Judge (S.D.) Court No. 20 ,Barabanki and Another

Indu Agarwal and Another Vs U.P. State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission Thru. Chairman Lko. and 2 Others

Ram Kumar Maurya Vs Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No 25 Barabanki and 3 Others