Dismissed

Abdul Kadir Alias Kadir v. Civil Judge (Junior Division) District Gonda and 8 Others

Allahabad HC1 Oct 2024/4701/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking direction for expeditious disposal of an application, the Allahabad High Court dismissed the petition. The court deprecated the impleadment of the Civil Judge as an opposite party, noted factual discrepancies regarding the underlying statute, and found no occasion for a direction due to the applicant’s lack of diligence.

What did the court decide?

No direction for expeditious disposal was issued as the petition was dismissed.

Abdul Kadir Alias Kadir Vs Civil Judge… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:67909

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4701 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Abdul Kadir Alias Kadir Respondent :- Civil Judge (Junior Division) District Gonda And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amrendra Kumar

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Amrendra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶7

By means of the instant writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought issuance of a direction to the learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Gonda for expeditious disposal of an application under Section 151 C.P.C. filed in Misc. Case No.448 of 2024.

¶8

As far back as in the year 1995, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had deprecated the practice of impleading Civil Courts as opposite parties to the petition in the judgment passed in the case of Savitri Devi Vs. District Judge, Gorakhpur; (1999) 2 SCC 577. The aforesaid principle has been reiterated in Jogendrasinhji Vijaysinghji v. State of Gujrat, (2015) 9 SCC 1. Yet the petitioner has impleaded the learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Gonda as an opposite party to the petition. This conduct of the petitioner is strongly deprecated and it is ordered that learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Gonda shall not be treated as an opposite party to the petition.

¶9

Although the prayer clause of the petition seeks direction for expeditious disposal of an application under Section 151 C.P.C. , a copy of the application annexed with the petition indicates that it is an application under Order 39 rule 2A C.P.C. read with Section 151 C.P.C. Therefore, it appears that the petitioner has not pleaded correct facts in the petition and has not disclosed that the application, which is sought to be decided expeditiously, is not an application under Section 151 C.P.C. but it is an application under Order 39 rule 2A C.P.C.

¶10

Therefore, the petition has been drafted in a careless manner and facts have not been pleaded and prayer has not been claimed properly. A copy of the order sheet of proceedings initiated on the application under Order 39 rule 2A C.P.C. has been annexed with the petition, which shows that the application under Order 39 rule 2A C.P.C. was filed on

¶11

04.07.2024 on which date, notice was issued to the other side. The petitioner's counsel as well as Sub-Inspector/Station House Officer attended the proceedings on 20.08.2024. The typed copy of the order sheet mentions that on 20.08.2024, the next date was again fixed for 20.08.2024. On the second order purportedly passed on 20.08.2024, it is recorded that the counsel for the applicant was not present.

¶12

From perusal of the typed copy of the order sheet annexed with the petition, which has been verified to be true in the affidavit filed in support of the application, it appears that the applicant himself is not pursuing the proceedings diligently.

¶13

Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, there is no occasion for issuing any direction for expeditious disposal of the proceedings.

¶14

The petition is hereby dismissed .

¶15

[Subhash Vidyarthi,J.]

¶16

Order Date :- 1.10.2024 -Amit K-

¶17

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

Abdul Kadir Alias Kadir v. Civil Judge (Junior Division) District Gonda and 8 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Kadir Alias Kadir v. Civil Judge (Junior Division) District Gonda and 8 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

X Rape Victim, Crime No 007 of 2022, Thru. Her Father/ Informant Vs Nisha Anand, Distt. Steering Committe Thru. Its Chairman / D.M., Amethi

Parminder Singh Ranhotra and Another Vs Shri Suryapal Gangwar, District Magistrate / Collector Lko.

State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Medical Health and Family Welfare Lko and Another Vs Emergency Dhatri Sishu Care Foundation Thru. Auth. Repr. Toopilivenkatasravan Kumar Reddy and Anr.

Ram Khelavan Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation, Barabanki and Others

Shiv Nath and 2 Others Vs Dy. Director of Consolidation, Ayodhya and Another

Anil Kumar Singh Vs U.P. State Public Services Tribunal,Indira Bhawan,Lko. and 4 Others