Dismissed

Smt Kaneeza Khatoon v. Mohd Junaid and 8 Others

Allahabad HC12 Nov 2024A227/14159/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a direction under Article 227 for the early disposal of a pending civil suit. The Court declined to grant the relief, adhering to the precedent that such directions are generally inappropriate as the urgency lies with the trial court's discretion.

What did the court decide?

Delay in disposal of suit will be determined by the discretion of the learned Trial Judge.

Smt Kaneeza Khatoon vs Mohd Junaid and 8… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:177355

¶2

Court No. - 9

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 14159 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Smt Kaneeza Khatoon Respondent :- Mohd Junaid And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Lal Bahadur,Ram Sajiwan Prajapati

¶5

Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶6

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

¶7

"i) Issue a order or direction to Civil Judge (Senior Division) Amroha to decided in O.S. No. 402 of 2020 (Mohd. Junaid Versus Smt. Kaneeza Khatoon and others),) which is pending before the Civil Judge (Senior Division) Amroha, within a stipulated time period by this Hon'ble Court."

¶8

From the perusal of the record, it transpires that the prayer has been made for early disposal of Suit No. 402 of 2020 pending in the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Amroha.

¶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), District-Azamgarh. 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

¶11

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.

¶12

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.

¶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 :- 12.11.2024 V.S.Singh

¶17

Digitally signed by :- VIDYA SAGAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt Kaneeza Khatoon v. Mohd Junaid and 8 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Kaneeza Khatoon v. Mohd Junaid and 8 Others

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

Similar cases

Smt. Pushpa Devi vs Shri Dharmendra Singh, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil-Sikandrabad, District-Hathras

Abdul Hameed Since Deceased and 4 Others vs Smt. Fatma and Another

Km. Laiqua and Another vs Mohd Qamar (Since Deceased) and 29 Others

Tulsidas @ Tulsi and Another vs Universal Sompo General Insurance Company Limited and 5 Others

Neeraj Gupta vs Lalit Lal @ Lalit Kumar Sriwastawa

Smt Sushila Devi (Since Deceased) and Another vs Surendra Kumar Jaiswal and 5 Others