Disposed

Majnu Harijan v. Arun Kumar Yadav

Allahabad HC4 Feb 2025A227/1010/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought an order directing the trial court to expedite a pending civil suit. The High Court found no extraordinary circumstances warranting interference and rejected the petition, granting liberty to the petitioner to apply to the trial court directly for expedited disposal.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of; liberty granted to move application before trial court for expedited disposal.

Majnu Harijan vs Arun Kumar Yadav — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:15527

¶2

Court No. - 9

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1010 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Majnu Harijan Respondent :- Arun Kumar Yadav Counsel for Petitioner :- Akanksha Gaur,Gaurav Khare,Rashtrapati Khare

¶5

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶7

In view of the proposed order notice to private respondent is dispensed with.

¶8

By means of the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India a prayer has been made for expeditious disposal of Suit No.649 of 2024 (Majnu Harijan Vs. Arun Kumar Yadav), pending before Civil Judge, Junior Division, District Jaunpur.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance of the petition would be sufficiently met in case Civil Judge, Junior Division, District Jaunpur, considers and decides the aforesaid suit in the time bound manner.

¶10

Considering the fact that the suit was filed in 2024 of which notices have been issued and proceedings are underway, there is no disclosure of any extra ordinary circumstances as to why this Court should exercise its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to direct the trial court to decide the same expeditiously.

¶11

This Court is conscious of the fact that the trial courts are burdened to heavy dockets and in a routine manner directions cannot be passed to the trial court to decide any particular case out of turn expeditiously. It is when some extra ordinary circumstances is made out only then it would be appropriate for this Court to exercise its extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. There also liberty should be given to the petitioner to place her grievances before the trial court who after looking into the urgency as well as dockets situation and pass appropriate orders to expedite the suit proceedings. In the present

¶12

case no such circumstances has been mentioned or made out requiring interference of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Hence the prayer as sought by the petitioner is rejected.

¶13

However, liberty is given to the petitioner to move appropriate application detailing urgency for expeditiously disposal of the aforesaid application before the trial court. In case, such application is moved within two weeks from today the trial court shall consider and decide the same expeditiously, say, within three weeks thereafter. In case, the trial court is prima facie satisfied that a case for urgency is made out it shall pass suitable order thereon.

¶14

With aforesaid observation and direction the petition stands disposed of .

¶15

Order Date :- 4.2.2025 Radhika

¶16

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶17

Digitally signed by :- RADHIKA VISHWAKARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Majnu Harijan v. Arun Kumar Yadav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Majnu Harijan v. Arun Kumar Yadav

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

Similar cases

Heera Lal Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Forest Lko and 5 Others

Neeraj Kumar and 24 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 5 Others

Jitendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Mahaveer Singh and Another vs Tejpal and Another

Ramchandra Dead and 4 Others vs Nand Kishore Dead and 21 Others

Jitendra Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another