The High Court dismissed a petition seeking a direction to expedite the disposal of a civil suit pending in the Court of Civil Judge, Gorakhpur, relying on the Division Bench precedent that prohibits issuing such time-bound directions to subordinate courts.
The prayed direction for expeditious disposal of the civil suit was refused.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:167513
Court No. - 9
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 13241 of 2024
Petitioner :- Saiyada Begam Respondent :- Nasir Ali @ Balle Counsel for Petitioner :- Animesh Pandey
Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
"(i) Issue an order or direction of suitable nature directing the Ld. Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) Court No. 15 Gorakhpur to decide the Civil Suit bering O.S. No. 1710/2014 [Nasir Ali @ Balle vs Saiyada Begam and ors.] pending before the Court of Ld. Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) Court No. 15 Gorakhpur, expeditiously preferably within a fix time frame as fixed by this Hon'ble Court."
"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.
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 mind and decide whether the hearing of the suit to be expedited.
For these reasons, we are not inclined to entertain the petition. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to cost."
Order Date :- 21.10.2024 Shekhar
Digitally signed by :- SHASHI SHEKHAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition can be entertained to direct the sub-ordinate courts to decide a civil suit within a stipulated period.
Whether the High Court can issue a direction for the expeditious hearing of a civil suit pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division).
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Ali Shad Usmani vs. Ali IstebaRelied on¶9
Ali Shad Usmani vs. Ali Isteba, 2015 (2) ADJ 250 (DB)
Saiyada Begam
Nasir Ali @ Balle
Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
Shashi Shekhar Pandey
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
