Disposed

Nishant Rastogi @ Nishant Kumar Rastogi v. Learned Civil Judge (J/D) West, Hardoi and 3 Others

Allahabad HC11 Jan 2024/82/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, exercising supervisory jurisdiction, dispensed with notice to additional landlords and directed the trial court to decide a pending application for interim injunction most expeditiously within six weeks, without examining the merits of the opposing parties.

What did the court decide?

Directing the trial court to decide the pending application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC expeditiously within six weeks.

Nishant Rastogi @ Nishant Kumar Rastogi Vs Learned… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:2977

¶2

Court No. - 8

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 82 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Nishant Rastogi @ Nishant Kumar Rastogi Respondent :- Learned Civil Judge (J/D) West, Hardoi And 3 Others

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Lalla Chauhan

¶6

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Amrendra Kumar, learned counsel has put in appearance and filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the private-respondent No.2, which is taken on record.

¶8

The petitioner has approached this Court with limited prayer that the petitioner is a tenant of premises of which the privaterespondents No.2 to 4 are the landlords. Since, the petitioner was under imminent threat of dispossession, accordingly, he instituted a suit for permanent injunction before the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), West, Hardoi registered as R.S. No.461/2021.

¶9

It is further stated that another application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC was filed along with the suit upon which notices were issued to the defendants-respondents in the suit. It is further stated that thought the private-respondents No.2 to 4 have been served yet neither the written statement has been filed nor the objection to the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC has been filed, as a result, the application of the petitioner has not been finally decided and on the other hand the petitioner is facing threat of dispossession at the behest of the private-respondents. In the aforesaid circumstances, it has been pleaded that the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC may be decided expeditiously.

¶10

Shri Amrendra Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 submits that he has no objection in case if the application is directed to be decided within a time frame. However, what is noticable is the fact that Shri Amrendra Kumar, learned counsel has filed his Vakalatnama only on behalf of the respondent No.2 whereas the private-respondents No.3 and 4 are also real brothers of the respondent No.2.

¶11

Be that as it may in light of the order proposed to be passed by this Court, notice to the private-respondents No.3 and 4 is

¶12

dispensed with.

¶13

Since, the petitioner is confining his prayer only for expeditious disposal of his application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC and considering the extracts of the order-sheets which have been brought on record, this Court does not deem it appropriate to keep the petition pending rather ends of justice can be served by directing the trial Court to consider and decide the pending application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC in R.S. No.461/2021 most expeditiously, after affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties, but without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties preferably within a period of six weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is placed before the Court concerned.

¶14

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

¶15

With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of .

¶16

Order Date :- 11.1.2024 Rakesh/-

¶17

Digitally signed by :- RAKESH PRAJAPAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Nishant Rastogi @ Nishant Kumar Rastogi v. Learned Civil Judge (J/D) West, Hardoi and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nishant Rastogi @ Nishant Kumar Rastogi v. Learned Civil Judge (J/D) West, Hardoi and 3 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Nizam Dyeing Works Private Ltd. Thru. Director Sri Hasmat Ali Vs Civil Judge,Junior Division, South Unnao and 2 Others

Gudiya Vs Civil Judge, Junior Division, Faizabad and 4 Others

Lalji and Others Vs D.D.C.and Others

Devesh Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Sushila vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Dr. Jamal Ahmad Khan Vs Civil Judge (S.D) Malihabad Distt. Lko. and 16 Others