Disposed

Surya Narayan v. Brijesh Kumar and 9 Others

Allahabad HC3 Jan 2024/6224/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On a writ petition under Article 227 regarding delayed disposal of objections under Order 39 Rule 4 CPC, the Court directed the Civil Judge to decide the pending stay vacation application expeditiously after hearing parties, without granting adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Directed Civil Judge to dispose expeditiously of pending objections and stay vacation application after hearing.

Surya Narayan Vs Brijesh Kumar and 9 Others — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:1004

¶2

Court No. - 8

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6224 of 2023 Petitioner :- Surya Narayan Respondent :- Brijesh Kumar And 9 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Kumar Dubey

¶4

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶6

The instant petition has been preferred seeking expeditious disposal of objections filed by the petitioner in response to the application preferred by the plaintiff-respondents no. 1 under Order 39 Rule 4 C.P.C.

¶7

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the respondent no. 1 has filed a suit for injunction bearing No. 112 of 2023 wherein an interim order has been granted by the court concerned on 01.03.2023.

¶8

It is further urged that the defendant no. 1 of the suit who is the petitioner before this Court has filed his objections on 15.05.2023 clearly indicating that the plaintiff had not disclosed the complete and true facts and as such the interim order is vitiated on account of concealment of fact.

¶9

He further submits that though repeated dates have been fixed but his application purportedly under Order 39 Rule 4 C.P.C. has yet not been disposed of. In the aforesaid backdrop, the petitioner submits that some expedite order be passed.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that no gainful purpose will be served in keeping the aforesaid petition pending rather ends of justice can be served by directing the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Musafirkhana, District Sultanpur to consider and finally decide the pending proceedings of the pending objections/stay vacation application filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties, but without granting any unnecessary adjournments.

¶11

It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merits and the authority concerned shall be free to decide the matter strictly in accordance with law.

¶12

With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of .

¶13

Order Date :- 3.1.2024/Asheesh

¶14

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

Surya Narayan v. Brijesh Kumar and 9 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surya Narayan v. Brijesh Kumar and 9 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

Similar cases

Chhedi Vs D.D.C. and Others

Ram Das Vs Apar Commissioner Devi Patan Mandal Gonda and Ors.

Smt. Sahida Begum Vs Civil Judge (Junior Division) South, Court No. 24, Sultanpur and 2 Others

Vishundayal (Died) Thru. Satyadev and Others Vs Addl. Commissioner (Admin), Devipatan, Balrampur and Another

Sujeet Kumar Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Chairman/Registrar State Public Service Tribunal, Lko. and 4 Others

Rakesh Kumar Gautam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Stamps and Registration Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others