Petition seeking expeditious disposal of a Section 125 Cr.P.C. maintenance case was dismissed for non-prosecution, as neither petitioners nor their counsel appeared; interim order vacated.
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:78861
Court No. - 12
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 23717 of 2016
Petitioner :- Geeta Singh And 2 Others Respondent :- Additional Distt. Judge / Fast Track Court Gonda And Anr. Counsel for Petitioner :- Deomani Tripathi,Ram Nihore Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
(i) Vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt (The law assists only those who are vigilant, and not those who sleep over their rights); and
(ii) Interest reipublicae ut sit finis litium (In the interest of the society as a whole, the litigation must come to an end).
The above said two maxims are sister provisions, which would highlight and spotlight that the party seeking remedy before the Court should be vigilant, otherwise, the law would not come to their help and there should be end to litigation.
Order Date :- 27.11.2024 Anand/-
Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Geeta Singh And 2 Others
Additional Distt. Judge / Fast Track Court Gonda And Anr.
Saurabh Lavania
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
