Disposed

Smt. Raj Pati v. Civil Judge (Avar Khand), South Room No. 24, Sultanpur and Another

Allahabad HC19 Mar 2024A227/1371/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single-judge High Court disposed of a writ petition filed under Article 227 for expeditious disposal of an objection under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of CPC pending before a Civil Judge. The court directed the respondent to decide the matter within six months, dispensing with notice to private respondents.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent to decide the objection under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of CPC within six months.

Smt. Raj Pati vs Civil Judge (Avar Khand)… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:23789

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1371 of 2024 Petitioner :- Smt. Raj Pati Respondent :- Civil Judge (Avar Khand), South Room No. 24, Sultanpur And Another

¶4

Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjeev Kumar Shukla

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Heard.

¶7

In view of the order proposed to be passed by this Court, notice to the private-respondent(s) is dispensed with.

¶8

Present petition has been filed for expeditious disposal of Objection 4-Ga under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of CPC preferred in Regular Suit No. 1067 of 2023, which is pending consideration before the respondent No.1.

¶9

Taking note of the facts as indicated in the present petition as also that the Objection 4-Ga under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of CPC preferred in Regular Suit No. 1067 of 2023 on 31.08.2023, which is pending till date as also that as per Circular No.C.L. No.24/Admin. G-II dated Allahabad 16.08.2017, issued by this Court, according to which, an application seeking temporary injunction should be decided within a period of six months, this Court is of the view that no fruitful purpose will be served in keeping this petition pending.

¶10

Accordingly, present petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.1-Civil Judge, (Avar Khand), South Room No. 24, Sultanpur, to consider and decide the Objection 4-Ga under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of CPC, most expeditiously, after affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties to the litigation and without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either party preferably within a period of six months from the next date fixed in the case, if there is no other legal impediment in this regard.

¶11

It is made clear that this Court has not examined the case of either party 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 :- 19.3.2024 Vinay/-

¶14

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

Smt. Raj Pati v. Civil Judge (Avar Khand), South Room No. 24, Sultanpur and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Raj Pati v. Civil Judge (Avar Khand), South Room No. 24, Sultanpur 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

Jyoti Sharma Thru. Power of Attorney Holder Mr. Sunil Kumar Verma Vs Presidding Officer Debt. Recovery Tribunal Lko. and Another

Munna Singh Rawat Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Transport Lko. U.P. and 2 Others

Shyam Kumar Vs Civil Judge (J.D.) Sadar, Faizabad and 2 Others

Srimati Kuntee Vs the Court of Sub Divisional Officer Tehsil Musafirkhana Distt. Amethi and 3 Others

Smt. Raj Pati Vs Civil Judge (Avar Khand), South Room No. 24, Sultanpur and Another

Baliram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lucknow and Others