Disposed

Dinesh Coomar and 2 Others v. the Court of Civil Judge,(S.D.)/Addl. Civil Judge(S.D.),Court NO.44,LKO. and Another

Allahabad HC25 May 2024A227/2581/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition under Article 227 sought a direction to a Lucknow civil judge to expedite two suits for permanent injunction and a related Order 39 Rule 2A case. The High Court noted only two or three years had elapsed, no extraordinary circumstances or urgency existed, and rejected the prayer while permitting a future application to the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for expedited disposal rejected; petitioner permitted to apply to trial court at appropriate stage.

Dinesh Coomar and 2 Others vs the Court of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:39910

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2581 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Dinesh Coomar And 2 Others Respondent :- The Court Of Civil Judge,(S.D.)/Addl. Civil Judge(S.D.),Court No.44,Lko. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Ganga Sagar Misra,Anchal Shukla

¶5

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶7

By means of the present petition under Article 227 prayer has been made for a direction to the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Lucknow/Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No.44, Lucknow Civil Judge (Senior Division), Lucknow to expedite the cases bearing No. (1) Regular Suit No.696/2021 (New Suit No.536/2024) 'Pradeep Kumar Raizada Vs. Smt. Raman Coomar and others, (2) regular suit No.926/23 (old no.359/2021 after that 170/2022,'Pradeep Kumar Raizada Vs. Smt. Raman Coomar and others both for permanent injunction (3) Misc. Case No.154 of 2023 under Order 39 Rule 2A CPC arising out of R.S. No.696/2021 title name Sharad Coomar Vs. Pradeep Kumar Raizada and another.

¶8

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the aforesaid suits have been filed either by the petitioners or or by opposite party No.2 and prayer has been made for deciding the them expeditiously.

¶9

It is noticed that the suits have been filed only in 2021, 2022 and 2023 and barely two or three years have passed and considering the heavy pendency before the trial courts, the direction as sought by the petitioner cannot be granted without there being some extraordinary circumstances.

¶10

A perusal of the order sheet also indicates that the matter is being regularly listed and considering the fact that no urgency is made out, no such direction can be issued to the trial court for expediting the suits in the manner as prayed by the petitioner and accordingly, prayer made by the petitioner is rejected.

¶11

However, the present order shall not debar the petitioner from moving an application before the trial court at appropriate stage

¶12

in case the petitioner is of the view that the suit is pending for considerably long length of time. On such application being moved the trial court shall consider and decide the same with expedition in accordance with law.

¶13

With aforesaid direction, the petition stands disposed of.

¶14

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶15

Order Date :- 25.5.2024

¶16

RKM.

¶17

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

Dinesh Coomar and 2 Others v. the Court of Civil Judge,(S.D.)/Addl. Civil Judge(S.D.),Court NO.44,LKO. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Coomar and 2 Others v. the Court of Civil Judge,(S.D.)/Addl. Civil Judge(S.D.),Court NO.44,LKO. 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

Ashok Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue U.P. and Ors.

Hausila Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Ram Shankar Vs Board of Revenue Thru. Its Chairman Lko. and 3 Others

Ramapati vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj, Lucknow and 6 Others

Vindhyachal and Another vs Shri Avinash Singh, District Magistrate, Distt. Ambedkar Nagar

Anil Kumar and Another Vs Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Faizabad and Another