Disposed

Manoj Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Civil Sectt. Govt. Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC23 Apr 2024/1966/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Article 227 writ petition, the High Court declined to interfere with alleged delay in deciding an interim injunction application in a regular civil suit, dismissing the plea for extraordinary circumstances and allowing liberty to approach the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to approach the trial court with an application for urgent disposal of the interim application within two weeks.

Manoj Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:31507

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1966 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Civil Sectt. Govt. Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ravindra Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Ravindra Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. In view of the proposed order notice to private respondents is dispensed with.

¶7

By means of the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India a prayer has been made for expeditious disposal of application for stay/interim relief under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC, filed in Regular Suit No. 1175 of 2023 - Rajesh Kumar Singh Vs. Manoj Kumar Singh and Another, pending before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), CourtNo. 15, Sultanpur.

¶8

It is urged that though the matter is being listed but for one reason or the other the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC is not being decided.

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that private respondents had filed a suit for permanent injunction against petitioner. In the said suit an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC has also been filed and on which in interim temporary injunction has been granted in favour of private respondents on 29.11.2023. The petitioner being defendant has also put in appearance and has also filed his objections on 12.01.2024, but the grievance is that the interim injunction application has not been disposed of, hence prayer has been made that trial Court may be directed to decide the application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC expeditiously.

¶10

Considering the fact that objections have been filed only in January, 2024 and the suit pertains to 2023, the petitioner has not been able to make out any extraordinary circumstance for interference by this Court in exercise of power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

¶11

At this stage, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter. However, liberty is granted to the defendant-petitioner to approach the trial Court and move an appropriate application

¶12

within two weeks from today showing urgency in deciding the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC. In case any such application is made, the trial Court shall proceed to consider and decide the same within three weeks thereafter, and in case any ground for urgency is made out by the petitioner, the trial Court shall pass appropriate orders thereupon, in accordance with law.

¶13

It is made clear that this Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merit and the Court concerned shall decide the matter strictly in accordance with law.

¶14

With the aforesaid observations, the petition is disposed of . Order Date :- 23.4.2024 A. Verma

¶15

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶16

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Manoj Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Civil Sectt. Govt. Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Civil Sectt. Govt. Lko. and 2 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Lakhan and Others Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation Faizabad and Others

Vikram Dixit Vs the Court, Additional Principal Judge Room No. 7 Family Court Lko. and Another

Vinay Shanker Singh Vs Civil Judge (S.D.) Court No. 15 , Sultanpur and 5 Others

Saroj Sengar Vs Civil Judge (Senior Division) Court No. 15, Distt. Sultanpur and 2 Others

Sita Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief/Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Panchayat Raj Lko. and 5 Others

Ankur Chopra and Another Vs Addl. Judge Small Causes Court No 19 Lko. and 4 Others