Disposed

Smt. Reeta Devi v. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 20. , Barabanki and Another

Allahabad HC10 Jul 2024/3167/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court, on a writ petition under Article 227, directed the Barabanki Civil Judge to decide a pending suit for specific performance and injunction without unnecessary adjournment, granting liberty to the petitioner to file an urgency application.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed with liberty to move urgency application before Civil Judge; respondent directed to decide expeditiously without unnecessary adjournment.

Smt. Reeta Devi Vs Civil Judge (Senior… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:46815

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3167 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Smt. Reeta Devi Respondent :- Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 20. , Barabanki And Another

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Mahesh Kumar Sharma

¶6

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the case.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the present writ petition has been preferred for issuing direction to the respondent no. 1-Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 20, District Barabanki to decide the application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 C.P.C. in Regular Suit No. 531 of 2023(Reeta Devi Vs. Sadashiv), filed by the petitioner for specific performance and permanent injunction, which is pending since 20.10.2023, within a stipulated time as this Hon'ble Court may fix.

¶9

On being specifically asked from learned counsel for the petitioner that whether petitioner has preferred any application for early disposal of aforesaid application by showing urgency in the matter before the Court concerned, it has been replied by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such application has been preferred before the Court concerned and petitioner has approached this Court directly for deciding the claim petition expeditiously.

¶10

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that present petition may be disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to move an urgency application for early disposal of the aforesaid application before the Court concerned and if any such application is preferred by the petitioner the same may be decided within the stipulated time fix by this Court.

¶11

Learned Standing Counsel has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶12

On the request of learned counsel for the petitioner and without entering into the merit of the case, the present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move an urgency application for early disposal of aforesaid application before the respondent no. 1. If any such application is preferred, it is expected that the respondent no. 1 shall decide the urgency application preferred by the petitioner expeditiously in

¶13

accordance with law, after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and without providing any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

¶14

Order Date :- 10.7.2024 Ashish

¶15

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt. Reeta Devi v. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 20. , Barabanki and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Reeta Devi v. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 20. , Barabanki and Another

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

Samiuddeen @ Samiuddeen Nadavi Vs U.P. Waqf Tribunal Lucknow Thru Registrar and Anr.

Tushar Sharma and Another Vs Civil Judge (Senior Division) Court No 20 Barabanki and 4 Others

Chandramani Dubey Vs Civil Judge (Jr. Div. ) Narth Room No. 25 Sultanpur and 3 Others

Smt. Munni Devi Vs Kamal Kumar Tandon

Smt. Chitra Mishra Vs Smt. Purnima Mishra and 12 Others

Ramesh Kumar Nag Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lucknow and Another