Dismissed

Ved Prakash Srivastava and 2 Others v. Virendra Nath Srivastava and Another

Allahabad HC10 Sept 2024A227/4343/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under Article 227, the petitioners sought directions for expeditious disposal of a temporary injunction application. The court dismissed the petition, noting the trial court and respondents were acting promptly, and the petitioners' own application for disposal was pending before the trial court. Disposition: dismissed.

What the court decided

AI extract

Ved Prakash Srivastava and 2 Others vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:62294

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4343 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Ved Prakash Srivastava And 2 Others Respondent :- Virendra Nath Srivastava And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Avinash Singh Vishen,Nishant Pandey

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Avinash Singh Vishen, learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶7

By means of the instant writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have sought issuance of direction to the learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Dalmau, Raebareli for expeditious disposal of the application for temporary injunction filed in Regular Suit No.2003 of 2024.

¶8

The aforesaid suit has been filed by the petitioners on 13.08.2024 for a relief of perpetual injunction. The trial Court found that there was no sufficient reason for passing an ex-parte order of temporary injunction and it issued notice of the application and summons of the suit to the defendants, fixing 13.09.2024 for filing of objections against the application for temporary injunction and its disposal. On the same date, the trial Court issued a Commission to the Court Amin for local inspection of the property in dispute and submission of report. The defendants have already filed a written statement and objections against the application for temporary injunction on 27.08.2024 that is much before the date fixed by the trial Court i.e. 13.09.2024. The petitioner's have filed an application for expeditious disposal of the application for temporary injunction before the trial Court on 31.08.2024, which has been ordered to be put up on the date fixed.

¶9

From the aforesaid facts, it appears that the trial Court as well as the defendants in the suit are acting with promptitude in the matter. Therefore, this Court finds no reason to interfere in this petition filed on 07.09.2024 seeking expeditious disposal of the aforesaid suit and the application for temporary injunction filed on 13.08.2024, more particularly, when the petitioners' application dated 31.08.2024 for expeditious disposal of the application for temporary injunction is pending consideration before the trial Court.

¶10

Accordingly, the petition is dismissed .

¶11

[Subhash Vidyarthi,J.]

¶12

Order Date :- 10.9.2024/-Amit K-

¶13

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

Ved Prakash Srivastava and 2 Others v. Virendra Nath Srivastava and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Ved Prakash Srivastava and 2 Others v. Virendra Nath Srivastava and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Raj Kumar Bajpeyi Vs Additional District and Sessions Judge Court No 15 Lko. and 2 Others

Ajay Kumar Rawat Vs State of U.P Thru. Addil. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Lallu Ram Vs District Judge, Distt. Shrawasti and 5 Others

Mohd. Azim and another vs Mohd. Ishaq and others

Smt. Vandana vs Shyam Kumar

Kanchan Kankubji Gupta vs Smt. Sangeeta Devi