Disposed

Neelam Pal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Mar 2024A227/1357/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought a direction under Article 227 for the Family Court to decide a pending suit within one month. The court directed the trial court to dispose within three months without unnecessary adjournments, subject to legal impediments, and dismissed the petition without affecting the suit merits.

What did the court decide?

The trial court was directed to decide the pending suit within three months from the date of filing the certified copy of this order, without unnecessary adjournments, subject to legal impediments or

Neelam Pal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:23867

¶2

Court No. - 16

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1357 of 2024 Petitioner :- Neelam Pal Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Anil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri Awadhesh Kumar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed with a prayer to issue an order or direction commanding the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Faizabad to decide the Suit No.243 of 2019 pending since 07.12.2019 within one month.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a positive direction be given to the trial court to decide the aforesaid case within a stipulated period.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has no objection on the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that a positive direction be given to the trial court to decide the case of the petitioner, as merely keeping pending the same by the trial court does not suffice any purpose of the litigation.

¶9

In view of the statements made by the learned counsel for the parties, the trial court is directed to decide the aforesaid case of the petitioner expeditiously i.e. within three months, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties from the date of filing of the certified copy of this order, unless there is some legal impediment or unless there is any order passed by the higher court staying the proceedings of the case.

¶10

With the aforesaid observation, the petition is disposed of finally.

¶11

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this petition and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶12

Order Date :- 19.3.2024/Saurabh

¶13

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Neelam Pal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neelam Pal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

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

Gautam Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Bhallu Vs State of U.P.

Ram Manorath and Another Vs State of U.P.

Jagmohan Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Anuradha Dubey vs Principal Judge Family Court Faizabad and Another

Bindra and Another Vs State of U.P.