Disposed

Rajeev Kumar Goswami and 3 Others v. Civil Judge (South) Awar Khand, Room No. 24, Sultanpur and 2 Others

Allahabad HC25 Apr 2024/2017/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition under Article 227 sought expeditious disposal of a pending civil suit. Court rejected general prayer citing existing administrative directions for zero pendency but granted liberty to file a specific urgent application.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for expeditious disposal rejected; liberty granted to move urgent application within two weeks.

Rajeev Kumar Goswami and 3 Others Vs Civil… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:32420

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2017 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Rajeev Kumar Goswami And 3 Others Respondent :- Civil Judge (South) Awar Khand, Room No. 24, Sultanpur And 2 Others

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Vishram Kumar Chauhan

¶6

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶7

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

¶8

By means of the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India a prayer has been made for expeditious disposal of Original Suit No. 463 of 2021 (Rajiv Kumar Goswami and Others Vs. Krishna Giri and Others), pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), South, Room No. 24, Sultanpur.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance of the petitioner would be sufficiently met in case the Civil Judge (Junior Division), South, Room No. 24, Sultanpur, considers and decides the aforesaid case in the time bound manner.

¶10

In this regard, it is noteworthy, that this Court on administrative side has already issued directions to the Courts below to obtain zero pendency of cases which are more than five years old. In view of directions already issued on administrative side, this Court is not inclined to pass any further order on judicial side. Hence, the prayer is rejected.

¶11

However, liberty is given to the petitioner to move appropriate application detailing urgency for expeditiously disposal of the suit before the trial Court. In case, such application is moved within two weeks from today the trial Court shall consider and decide the same expeditiously, say, within three weeks thereafter. In case, the trial Court is prima facie satisfied that a case for urgency is made out it shall pass suitable orders thereon.

¶12

With aforesaid observation and direction the petition stands disposed of .

¶13

Order Date :- 25.4.2024 A. Verma

¶14

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶15

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

Rajeev Kumar Goswami and 3 Others v. Civil Judge (South) Awar Khand, Room No. 24, Sultanpur and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajeev Kumar Goswami and 3 Others v. Civil Judge (South) Awar Khand, Room No. 24, Sultanpur 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

Lavlesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home and Others

Sri Ranvir Singh Bath Vs Debts Recovery Tribunal Lko. Thru. Presiding Officer and Another

Shobhit Srivastava Vs Civil Judge (Senior Division) Malihabad, Lko. and Another

Nagar Panchayat Itaunja,Lucknow Thru. Its Chairman Awadhesh Kumar Awasthi Vs Addl. Civil Judge, Room No. 21 (Senior Division) Lucknow and 7 Others

Anand Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Deptt. of Home, Lucknow and Others

Raj Kumar Gupta Vs Civil Judge Lucknow Senior Division Lko. and Another