Dismissed¶15

M/S. Vijay Machinery Stores and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC6 Jan 2025A227/16362/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Article 227 petition dismissed; prayer for early/stipulated-period disposal of suit no. 415/2017 (pending since 2017) before Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bansgaon, Gorakhpur declined; no direction to subordinate court to expedite suit, per Division Bench precedent Ali Shad Usmani vs. Ali Isteba, 2015 (2) ADJ 250 (DB); High Court of Judicature at Allahabad; Rohit Ranjan Agarwal, J.; Order Date 6.1.2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:2186; counsel: Vinay Kumar Singh (for petitioner), C.S.C. (for respondents).

What did the court decide?

In view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Ali Shad Usmani (supra), the Court declines to grant the relief prayed for; no direction is issued to the trial court to dispose of suit no. 415/2017 within a stipulated period, and the writ petition is dismissed. ¶14

M/S. Vijay Machinery Stores and Another vs State… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:2186

¶2

Court No. - 9

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 16362 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- M/S. Vijay Machinery Stores And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinay Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶6

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

¶7

"i) to direct the Civil Judge (Senior Division) Bansgaon Gorakhpur to decide the suit no.415/2017 (M/s. Vijay Machinery Stores Vs. Exclusive Officer Nagar Panchayat Bansgaon and others) pending before him since 2017 within stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court."

¶8

From the perusal of the record, it transpires that the petitioner has prayed for early disposal of suit no.415/2017, pending before the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) Bansgaon Gorakhpur.

¶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

¶12

mind and decide whether the hearing of the suit to be expedited.

¶13

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

¶14

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.

¶15

The writ petitions is dismissed .

¶16

Order Date :- 6.1.2025 SK Goswami

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SHIVAKANT GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

M/S. Vijay Machinery Stores and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Vijay Machinery Stores and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 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

Bhagirathi Since Deceased and 8 Others vs Ramroop (Since Deceased) and 27 Others

Pooran Chand Gupta vs Shashi Kiran and 5 Others

Nagar Panchayat Pipiganj Dictrict Gorakhpur through Its Chairman vs Purshottam Prasad

Tarunesh Kumar Deo vs Rajveer and 4 Others

Akhilesh Kumar Shukla and 3 Others vs Smt. Asha Devi and 6 Others

Executive Engineer Electricity Transmission Davison vs Brij Kishore Sonkar