Dismissed¶14

Bhagirathi Since Deceased and 8 Others v. Ramroop (Since Deceased) and 27 Others

Allahabad HC3 Jan 2025A227/16285/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Article 227 / Article 226 - prayer for direction for early/expeditious disposal of civil suit - Civil Suit No. 310 of 2006 before Civil Judge (S.D.), Shahar Varanasi - Ali Shad Usmani vs. Ali Isteba, 2015 (2) ADJ 250 (DB) followed - no direction to subordinate courts to decide suit within stipulated period; urgency is for trial court's discretion - writ petition dismissed - decided 03.01.2025 - Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:1185.

What did the court decide?

Following the Division Bench judgment in Ali Shad Usmani (supra), no direction can be issued to subordinate courts to decide a suit within a stipulated period; the Court accordingly declined to grant the relief prayed for (expedited disposal of Civil Suit No. 310 of 2006). ¶13

Bhagirathi Since Deceased and 8 Others vs Ramroop… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:1185

¶2

Court No. - 9

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 16285 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Bhagirathi Since Deceased And 8 Others Respondent :- Ramroop (Since Deceased) And 27 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhupesh Pathak,Surya Bhan Dubey

¶5

Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶6

This writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:-

¶7

"issue a direction, directing the court of Civil Judge (S.D.) Shahar Varanasi to decide the Civil Suit bearing Suit No. 310 of 2006 (Bhagirathi and others Vs. Ramroop and others) pending before him within stipulated time which may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court."

¶8

From the perusal of the record, it transpires that the petitioner has prayed for early disposal of Civil Suit No.310 of 2006 pending before the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) Shahar Varanasi.

¶9

The Division Bench of this Court in case of Ali Shad Usmani vs. Ali Isteba, 2015 (2) ADJ 250 (DB) has held that no direction can be issued to the sub-ordinate courts for deciding the suit within stipulated period. Relevant portion of the judgment is extracted hereasunder:-

¶10

"We are not inclined to issue a direction for the expeditious hearing of a Civil Suit which is pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), DistrictAzamgarh. It would be most inappropriate to Court to entertain a writ petition under Article 226 and/or under Article 227 of the Constitution simply for the purpose of expediting the hearing of a suit. Such orders, if granted, place a class of litigants, who move the court in a separate and preferential category whereas other cases which may be of similar or greater antiquity and urgency are left to be decided in the normal channel. Hence, any such direction may be issued with the greatest care and circumspection by the High Court otherwise the Civil Courts will be overburdened only with requests for expeditious disposal of suits, which have been expedited by the High Court. Most of the litigants cannot afford the expense of moving the High court and would not, therefore, be in a position to have the benefit of such an order.

¶11

Ultimately, it must be left to the judicious exercise of discretion of the concerned Court to determine whether a ground for urgency has been made out. We emphasize that there may be other cases such as involving senior citizens, those who are differently abled or people suffering from a particular disablilty socio-economic or otherwise which may prime cause of urgent disposal. It is for the learned Trial Judge in each case to apply his or her mind and decide whether the hearing of the suit to be expedited.

¶12

For these reasons, we are not inclined to entertain the petition. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to cost."

¶13

In view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Ali Shad Usmani (supra), this Court declines to grant the relief as prayed for.

¶14

The writ petition is dismissed .

¶15

Order Date :- 3.1.2025 Kushal

¶16

Digitally signed by :- KUSHAL AGRAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Bhagirathi Since Deceased and 8 Others v. Ramroop (Since Deceased) and 27 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhagirathi Since Deceased and 8 Others v. Ramroop (Since Deceased) and 27 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manindra Nath Singh vs Kunwar Siddharth Singh and 4 Others

Prem Shankar Srivastava vs Registrar General High Court and Another

Mangu Lal @ Brijesh Kumar vs State of Up and Another

Pooran Chand Gupta vs Shashi Kiran and 5 Others

Nagar Panchayat Pipiganj Dictrict Gorakhpur through Its Chairman vs Purshottam Prasad

Dilip Rav vs State of U.P. and 4 Others