Dismissed

Rajesh Shukla v. Umesh Shukla and Another

Allahabad HC18 Oct 2024A227/12801/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a matter under Article 227, the High Court dismissed the petitioner's writ petition seeking a direction to expedite a pending civil suit. Relying on a Division Bench precedent, the Court held it inappropriate to issue such directions and refused the prayer.

What did the court decide?

The prayer for a direction to decide the pending suit within a stipulated period was refused and dismissed.

Rajesh Shukla vs Umesh Shukla and Another — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:175612

¶2

Court No. - 9

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 12801 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Rajesh Shukla Respondent :- Umesh Shukla And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Arvind Prabodh Dubey

¶5

Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶6

This writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:-

¶7

"(i) Issue a suitable direction to learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bansgaon, Gorakhpur to decide the original Suit No. 1048 of 2021 (Umesh Shukla Vs. Suresh Shukla and others), pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bansgaon, District-Gorakhpur within, stipulated period."

¶8

From the perusal of the record, it transpires that the petitioner has prayed for early disposal of Original Suit No.1048 of 2021, pending before the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bansgaon, Gorakhpur.

¶9

The Division Bench of this Court in case of Ali Shad Usmani vs. Ali Isteba, 2015 (2) ADJ 250 (DB) has held that no direction can be issued to the sub-ordinate courts for deciding the suit within stipulated period. Relevant portion of the judgment is extracted hereasunder:-

¶10

"We are not inclined to issue a direction for the expeditious hearing of a Civil Suit which is pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), DistrictAzamgarh. It would be most inappropriate to Court to entertain a writ petition under Article 226 and/or under Article 227 of the Constitution simply for the purpose of expediting the hearing of a suit. Such orders, if granted, place a class of litigants, who move the court in a separate and preferential category whereas other cases which may be of similar or greater antiquity and urgency are left to be decided in the normal channel. Hence, any such direction may be issued with the greatest care and circumspection by the High Court otherwise the Civil Courts will be overburdened only with requests for expeditious disposal of suits, which have been expedited by the High Court. Most of the litigants cannot afford the expense of moving the High court and would not, therefore, be in a position to have the benefit of such an order.

¶11

Ultimately, it must be left to the judicious exercise of discretion of the concerned Court to determine whether a ground for urgency has been made out. We emphasize that there may be other cases such as involving senior citizens, those who are differently abled or people suffering from a particular disablilty socio-economic or otherwise which may prime cause of urgent disposal. It is for the learned Trial Judge in each case to apply his or her

¶12

mind and decide whether the hearing of the suit to be expedited.

¶13

For these reasons, we are not inclined to entertain the petition. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to cost."

¶14

In view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Ali Shad Usmani (supra), this Court declines to grant the relief as prayed for.

¶15

The writ petitions is dismissed .

¶16

Order Date :- 8.11.2024 SK Goswami

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SHIVAKANT GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rajesh Shukla v. Umesh Shukla and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Shukla v. Umesh Shukla and Another

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

Uma Pati and 7 Others vs State of Up and Another

Smt. Madhu and 2 Others vs Badlu Prasad and 4 Others

Vijendra Singh and 5 Others vs State of Up and 6 Others

Pradeep Chawla vs Kanpur Development Authority and 2 Others

Lalli Lal vs Nagar Nigam Jhansh, through Ayukt Nagar

Chandan Singh vs Smt. Laxmi