Disposed

Rahmanul HUDA and 3 Others v. Civil Judge (Junior Division) Balrampur and 4 Others

Allahabad HC12 Sept 2024A227/4370/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court dismissed the impleadment of the Civil Judge as a respondent in a writ petition under Article 227 citing Supreme Court precedents. The Court directed the trial court to dispose of Regular Suit No.243 of 2020 expeditiously, preventing unnecessary adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Directed to strike out Civil Judge from respondent list and direct trial court to dispose of Regular Suit No.243 of 2020 expeditiously without unnecessary adjournments.

Rahmanul HUDA and 3 Others vs Civil Judge… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:63110

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4370 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Rahmanul Huda And 3 Others Respondent :- Civil Judge (Junior Division) Balrampur And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Waris Farooqui

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Mohd. Waris Farooqui, learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶7

The petitioners have impleaded the learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Balrampur in the array of opposite parties, whereas as per law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Savitri Devi Vs. District Judge, Gorakhpur ; (1999) 2 SCC 577 and in Jogendrasinhji Vijaysinghji v. State of Gujrat , (2015) 9 SCC 1, the Civil Courts ought not to be impleaded as opposite parties to the petitions filed in the High Courts.

¶8

Accordingly, learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to strike out the name of learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Balrampur from the array of opposite parties and renumber the opposite parties forthwith.

¶9

By means of the instant writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have sought issuance of a direction to the learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Balrampur for expeditious disposal of the Regular Suit No.243 of 2020.

¶10

The opposite parties namely, Tahir Husain and Mohd. Siraj have filed the aforesaid suit for perpetual injunction and the Court has granted a temporary injunction in their favour by means of an order dated 22.02.2022.

¶11

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that as an order of temporary injunction is operating against the petitioners, which is causing prejudice to them, it would be expedient in the interest of justice that the suit is decided expeditiously.

¶12

A perusal of the order sheet of the suit indicates that the trial Court framed issued on 21.05.2022 and thereafter, the matter

¶13

was fixed for 27.09.2022 for recording evidence of the plaintiff. Thereafter, on 27.09.2022, the plaintiff filed an application for amendment of the plaint, which was allowed by means of an order dated 24.02.2023. Since then, the case has repetitively been fixed for recording evidence but it has been adjourned on numerous occasions, without recording any reason.

¶14

In view of the aforesaid discussion, the petition is disposed of by issuing a direction to the learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Balrampur to proceed with the Regular Suit No.243 of 2020 expeditiously, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties.

¶15

[Subhash Vidyarthi,J.]

¶16

Order Date :- 12.9.2024

¶17

-Amit K-

¶18

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

Rahmanul HUDA and 3 Others v. Civil Judge (Junior Division) Balrampur and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahmanul HUDA and 3 Others v. Civil Judge (Junior Division) Balrampur and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Anil Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Smt. Sadhna Singh and 2 Others Vs Commissioner Under Workman Compensation Act 1923 and Dy. Labour Commissioner, Gonda and 2 Others

Mohammad Aleem Vs Civil Judge (J.D.) Sadar, Faizabad and 15 Others

Gurdas and Another vs Krishna Bihari Dwivedi and Another

Abhishek vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Zuber Farhat Khan vs U.P. Waqf Tribunal Lucknow U.P. Thru. Chairman and others