Disposed

Poonam Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Deptt. of Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Allahabad HC2 Jul 2024/3011/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge disposal of a writ petition under Article 227 seeking directions to the trial court to decide an injunction application under Order 39 Rule 1 CPC at the earliest, without examining merits. Decided on 2.7.2024.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the trial court to decide the urgency application and injunction application at the earliest without unnecessary adjournments.

Poonam Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:44775

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3011 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Poonam Verma Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Deptt. Of Revenue, Lucknow And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shiv Sharan Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned State Counsel.

¶7

Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that the present writ petition has been preferred for issuing direction to the respondent no. 2, Civil Judge (Junior Division), Biswan, Sitapur to take early decision on the application for injunction preferred by the petitioner in the suit filed under Order 39 Rule 1 C.P.C in Regular Suit no. 442 of 2020.

¶8

It is further submitted that the petitioner has also moved an application on 22.04.2024 for early hearing of the injunction application no. 6 (ga), under Order 39 Rule 1 C.P.C, but no order has been passed on the same and during the pendency of the injunction application and the urgency application, the construction work has started on the land in dispute.

¶9

After arguing at some length, learned counsel for petitioner has confined his prayer to the extent that a direction may be issued to the respondent no. 2 to decide the early hearing application and injunction application 6 (ga) preferred by the petitioner filed under Order 39 Rule 1 C.P.C along with the suit, at the earliest or within the stipulated time as this Court may fix.

¶10

On the request of learned counsel for petitioner and without entering into the merits of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of and it is expected that the respondent no. 2 shall make an endeavour to decide the urgency application and the injunction application 6 (ga) preferred by the petitioner as early as possible, in accordance with law after hearing the parties and without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

¶11

Order Date :- 2.7.2024 DiVYa

¶12

Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Poonam Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Deptt. of Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Poonam Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Deptt. of Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ritendra Kumar and 6 Others Vs Raghubir

Hargovind Dayal Kayastha Hostel Society,Lko. Thru. Its Secretary Vs Civil Judge (Junior Division ) South, Civil Court, Lko. and Another

U.P. Forest Corporation Lko. Thru. Its Managing Director and Others Vs Vinod Kumar

Hardesh Kumar Gupta and Another vs State of Up and 2 Others

Sri Abdul Rub Vs Sri Abdul Rashid

Banwari Lal Tiwari Vs Munsif MAGISTRATE-11, Gonda and 5 Others