Disposed

Sai Sahai Singh @ Sai Shay Singh v. Civil Judge (Jd) North, Room No. 25, Sultanpur and Another

Allahabad HC25 Jun 2024A227/2991/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought direction under Article 227 for expeditious decision of an interim relief application pending in a civil suit. The court granted liberty to file an urgency application without deciding merits.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file urgency application for early disposal; respondent court to decide expeditiously after hearing.

Sai Sahai Singh @ Sai Shay Singh vs Civil… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:49180

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2991 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Sai Sahai Singh @ Sai Shay Singh Respondent :- Civil Judge (Jd) North, Room No. 25, Sultanpur And Another

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Dhirendra Pratap Singh

¶6

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶7

Heard.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the present petition has been preferred for issuing a direction to the respondent no. 1-Civil Judge (JD) North, Room No. 25, Sultanpur to decide the interim relief application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 C.P.C. pending in Regular Suit (Original Suit) No. 135 of 2024 (Sai Sahai Singh Vs. Ramesh Bahadur Singh) preferred by the petitioner for cancellation of the sale deed, which is pending since 21.02.2024 within the time as specified by this Court.

¶9

On being asked from the learned counsel for the petitioner whether petitioner has preferred any urgency application for early disposal of the aforesaid application, learned counsel for the petitioner has replied that no such application has been preferred before the Court concerned and petitioner has approached this Court directly for deciding the case expeditiously.

¶10

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that present petition may be disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to move an urgency application for early disposal of the aforesaid application before the Court concerned and if any such application is preferred by the petitioner the same may be decided by the Court concerned within the stipulated time fix by this Court.

¶11

Learned Standing Counsel has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶12

On the request of learned counsel for the petitioner and without

¶13

entering into the merit of the case, the present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move an urgency application for early disposal of aforesaid application before the respondent no. 1. If any such application is preferred, it is expected that respondent no. 1 shall decide the urgency application preferred by the petitioner looking into the urgency mentioned therein expeditiously, in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, in case there is no legal impediment and if any adjournment is unavoidable only short adjournment may be given.

¶14

Order Date :- 22.7.2024 Ashish

¶15

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sai Sahai Singh @ Sai Shay Singh v. Civil Judge (Jd) North, Room No. 25, Sultanpur and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sai Sahai Singh @ Sai Shay Singh v. Civil Judge (Jd) North, Room No. 25, Sultanpur 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

M/S Nobal Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Authorized Representative Mr. Arun Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Infrastructure and Industrial Development and Anr.

Smt. Simmi Dhawan vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue Lko and 3 Others

Rajmani Mishra vs Nirmala Mishra and Another

Suresh Chandra and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Jagdish Prasad Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Rahmat Ali vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue and 4 Others