The High Court at Lucknow held that a writ petition under Article 227 seeking supervision over a civil proceeding became infructuous once the underlying application for condonation of delay was finally decided, dismissing the petition on that account.
The petition is dismissed as infructuous.
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-LKO:25717
Court No. - 8
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 22867 of 2017
Petitioner :- Jamuna Prasad Respondent :- Civil Judge South Court No. 24 Sultanpur And Anr Counsel for Petitioner :- Hanumant Lal Yadav,Vidya Bhushan Pandey
Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner who submits that the instant petition has become infructuous on account of passage of time; inasmuch as the petitioner had filed the petition seeking expeditious disposal of his application preferred under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC. However, the said application has been finally decided.
In view of the statement made by the counsel for the petitioner Shri Hanumant Lal Yadav, the instant petition is dismissed as infructuous.
Order Date :- 22.3.2024 ank
Digitally signed by :- ALI NEWAZ KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the present Article 227 petition is maintainable in light of the final disposal of the underlying Order 9 Rule 13 application by lapse of time.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Jamuna Prasad
Civil Judge South Court No. 24 Sultanpur
Jaspreet Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
