Disposed

Swami Dayal Tiwari and 2 Others v. Honble Court of Civil Judge(Senior Division) Room No. 15, Distt. Sultanpur and 2 Others

Allahabad HC4 Apr 2024A227/1680/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single-judge writer considered an Article 227 writ petition seeking directions to expeditiously decide an urgency application in a civil suit. Finding no ground for interference, the court granted liberty to file an application and directed the trial court to dispose of it within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to move an application for urgency; trial court directed to consider and decide the application expeditiously within three weeks.

Swami Dayal Tiwari and 2 Others vs Honble… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:28162

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1680 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Swami Dayal Tiwari And 2 Others Respondent :- Honble Court Of Civil Judge(Senior Division) Room No. 15, Distt. Sultanpur And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amitabh Kumar Tripathi,Ashish Kumar Shukla,Bal Krishna Dwivedi

¶5

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Amitabh Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶7

In the light of order proposed to be passed, notice to private respondents is dispensed with.

¶8

In the present writ petition prayer has been made by the petitioner seeking direction to Civil Judge (Senior Division) to decide application under Section 151 registered as Application No. 56 Ga-2, pending in the Original Suit No. 602 of 2021 - Ram Prasad Vs. Rajendra Kumar, expeditiously.

¶9

It is the case of the petitioner that suit for permanent injunction was filed by the petitioners alongwith an application for temporary injunction. The trial Court had also granted temporary injunction in favour of petitioner by order dated 18.10.2022.

¶10

It has been further alleged that despite passing of interim injunction in favour of petitioners, the defendants are not complying with the said order, consequently, an application under Order 31 Rules 1 and 2 CPC has been filed in the pending suit for consideration.

¶11

This Court has considered the arguments of the petitioners and does not find any extraordinary circumstance to interfere in the matter under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

¶12

However, in case there is any urgency for expeditious disposal of the aforesaid application, liberty is granted to the petitioners to move appropriate application before the trial Court within next two weeks, clearly stating the urgency. The trial Court is directed to consider and decide the said application expeditiously, say within three weeks thereafter, in case there is no legal impediment. The trial Court while

¶13

considering the aspect of urgency made by the petitioner, is of the opinion that case for urgency is made out, it shall proceed to pass appropriate orders on the application.

¶14

With above observations/directions the writ petition stands disposed of .

¶15

Order Date :- 4.4.2024 A. Verma

¶16

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶17

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

Swami Dayal Tiwari and 2 Others v. Honble Court of Civil Judge(Senior Division) Room No. 15, Distt. Sultanpur and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Swami Dayal Tiwari and 2 Others v. Honble Court of Civil Judge(Senior Division) Room No. 15, Distt. Sultanpur and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Krishnanand and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Civil Sectt. Lko and 3 Others

Anil Bansal Vs U.P. State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission Thru.Its Chairman Lko and 2 Others

Amita Verma Thru. Her Power of Attorney Holder Brijendra Singh Vs U.P. State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission,Lko. Thru. Chairman and 2 Others

Lucknow Development Authority, Lucknow Thru. Secy. vs Mahesh Ram

Karam Jeet Singh vs Civil Judge (S.D.) Pratapgarh and Another

Hari Om Singh and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and Others