Disposed

Mahesh Prasad Sharma @ Mahesh Prasad and Another v. Civil Judge J.D. Hawali Lko and 2 Others

Allahabad HC6 Aug 2024/3641/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition under Article 227 filed for direction to the Civil Judge to expedite disposal of an interim injunction application in a regular suit. The High Court disposed of the petition without deciding merits, granting liberty to the petitioners to file an urgency application before the court below.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioners to file an urgency application before the Civil Judge for early disposal of the interim injunction application, with a direction for expeditious hearing.

Mahesh Prasad Sharma @ Mahesh Prasad and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:53761

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3641 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Mahesh Prasad Sharma @ Mahesh Prasad And Another Respondent :- Civil Judge J.D. Hawali Lko And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohammad Aslam Beg

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the present petition has been preferred to direct the respondent no. 1 i.e. Civil Judge (Junior Division) Hawali Lucknow to decide the interim injunction Ga-6 Under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 C.P.C. filed by Respondent No.2 and 3 and objection filed by the petitioners in Regular Suit No.2360 of 2023 (Raj Kumar and another vs. Mahesh Prasad and another), within the time as fixed by this Court.

¶8

It is further submitted that in the said suit the petitioners are the defendant and they have already been filed their objections against the application for temporary injunction preferred by Respondent Nos.2 and 3, but no decision has been taken by the court below.

¶9

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

¶10

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

¶11

On the request of learned counsel for the petitioners and without entering into the merit of the case, the present petition

¶12

is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to move an urgency application for early disposal of the interim injunction applicant filed in Regular Suit No.2360 of 2023 (Raj Kumar and another vs. Mahesh Prasad and another) before respondent no. 1. If any such urgency application is preferred, it is expected that respondent no. 1 shall decide the urgency application expeditiously in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and without providing any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

¶13

Order Date :- 6.8.2024 S. Kumar

¶14

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

Mahesh Prasad Sharma @ Mahesh Prasad and Another v. Civil Judge J.D. Hawali Lko and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahesh Prasad Sharma @ Mahesh Prasad and Another v. Civil Judge J.D. Hawali Lko and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Santosh Kumar and Others vs Sri Ramesh Singh, Distt. Inspector of Schools, Ballia

Jagdish vs Ms. Aakriti Srivastava Tehsildar Sarojini Nagar Lucknow

Mohd. Sadique and Others vs Sanjay Mishra, Executive Officer Nagar Palika Parishad, Gonda

C/M Shri Dayanand Inter College and Another vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Nabi Ahmed vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 6 Others

Rajendra Prasad Gupta vs Sri Deepak Kumar, Director, National Saving Directorate, Lko. and Another