Disposed

Yaar Mohammad @ Yaar Mohammad Salmani v. Smt. Sandhya and 2 Others

Allahabad HC4 Jun 2024A227/2854/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition seeking expeditious disposal of a long-pending sale deed cancellation suit. The High Court, noting existing administrative directions on zero pendency, declined to interfere but granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the lower court with an urgent application for disposal within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioner to move an urgent application to the lower court for disposal within three weeks.

Yaar Mohammad @ Yaar Mohammad Salmani Vs Smt. Sandhya and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:42423

¶2

Court No. - 4

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2854 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Yaar Mohammad @ Yaar Mohammad Salmani Respondent :- Smt. Sandhya And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jay Prakash Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Jay Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State.

¶7

By means of the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India a prayer has been made for expeditious disposal of Original Suit for Sale Deed Cancellation bearing No. 516 of 2022 (Deen Mohammad and others Vs. Smt. Sandhya and others) pending since 5.9.2022 before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Tanda, Ambedkar Nagar.

¶8

It is urged that though several dates were fixed in the case but for one reason or the other, the Original Suit for cancellation of Sale Deed having Case No. 516 of 2022 (Deen Mohammad and others Vs. Smt. Sandhya and others) could not be decided.

¶9

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the court below may be directed to expeditiously decide the Original Suit bearing O.S. No. 516 of 2022 (Deen Mohammad and others Vs. Smt. Sandhya and others) in a time bound manner.

¶10

In view of the order proposed to be passed in the present writ petition notice to private respondents is dispensed with.

¶11

It is noteworthy, that this Hon'ble Court on administrative side has already issued directions to the Courts below to ensure zero pendency of cases which are more than five years old. In view of directions already issued on administrative side, this Court is not inclined to pass any further order on judicial side.

¶12

This Court at this stage is not inclined to interfere in the matter under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. However, in the interest of justice, liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Tanda, Ambedkar Nagar by moving an appropriate application detailing urgency for expeditious disposal of O.S. No. 516 of 2022 (Deen Mohammad and others Vs. Smt. Sandhya and others), and in case, if such an application is moved, the court concerned shall consider the same within a period of three weeks from the date of filing of application along with the copy of this order. It is provided that if the court concerned finds that a case for urgency is made out, it shall pass appropriate orders thereupon, in accordance with law.

¶13

It is made clear that this Court has not examined the case on merit and the Court concerned shall decide the same on merit strictly in accordance with law.

¶14

With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition is disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 4.6.2024 Virendra

¶16

Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Yaar Mohammad @ Yaar Mohammad Salmani v. Smt. Sandhya and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yaar Mohammad @ Yaar Mohammad Salmani v. Smt. Sandhya and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Neeraj Kumar Upadhyay Vs Assistant Collector / Tehsildar, Tehsil Kadipur, Sultanpur and Another

Ram Dular Vs State of U.P. Thru. District Magistrate, Sultanpur and Others

Shri Bhagwan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Amitabh Gupta Thru. Power of Attorney Ajay Kumar Pandey Vs Gangaram and Another

Ram Ganesh Shukla Vs Civil Judge (Praver Khand ) Court No. 38 Sultanpur and 3 Others

Shiv Shankar Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Forest Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another