Disposed

Mohobali @ Mohammad Ali v. Civil Judge (Junior Division) Room No. 29 Sultanpur and 16 Others

Allahabad HC4 Jun 2024A227/2870/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ under Article 227 seeking direction to decide a suit pending for over 27 years. Relying on existing administrative directions for zero pendency, the Court declined to pass a judicial order but granted liberty to approach the lower court for urgency.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of without further orders; liberty granted to apply for urgency to the lower court.

Mohobali @ Mohammad Ali Vs Civil Judge… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:42408

¶2

Court No. - 4

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2870 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Mohobali @ Mohammad Ali Respondent :- Civil Judge (Junior Division) Room No. 29 Sultanpur And 16 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Pandey

¶5

Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Vishnu Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶7

By means of the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought following prayer:-

¶8

"I. to issue an appropriate order or direction to direct the opposite party no. 1 i.e. the Civil Judge (Junior Division) Court No. 29, Sultanpur to decide the Regular Suit No. 576 of 1997 (Samirul Nishan and others Vs. Rahmat Ali and others) within stipulated time."

¶9

It is urged that though several dates were fixed in the case but for one reason or the other, the same could not be decided.

¶10

The prayer made in the present writ petition is limited only to the extent that the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court No. 29, Sultanpur be directed to decide the Regular Suit No. 576 of 1997 (Samirul Nisha and others Vs. Rahmat Ali and others) in a time bound manner.

¶11

It is noteworthy, that this 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

In view of the order proposed to be passed in the present writ petition, notice to private respondents no. 2 to 17 is dispensed with.

¶13

This Court at this stage is not inclined to interfere in the instant 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), Court No. 29, Sultanpur by moving an appropriate application detailing urgency for expeditious disposal of Regular Suit No. 576 of 1997 (Samirul Nisha and others Vs. Rahmat Ali 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 such an 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.

¶14

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.

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 4.6.2024 Virendra

¶17

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

Mohobali @ Mohammad Ali v. Civil Judge (Junior Division) Room No. 29 Sultanpur and 16 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohobali @ Mohammad Ali v. Civil Judge (Junior Division) Room No. 29 Sultanpur and 16 Others

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

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