Smt. Vijay Bhagwati vs Harendra Mittal and 5 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:17223

Court No. - 37

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 182 of 2025

Petitioner :- Smt. Vijay Bhagwati Respondent :- Harendra Mittal And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Tanisha Jahangir Monir Counsel for Respondent :- Jitender Singh,Prabhat Kumar Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard Ms. Tanisha Jahangir, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri Prabhat Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 1 to 4.

¶7

In the light of proposed order, notice to respondent nos. 5 and 6 is dispensed with.

¶8

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has filed a suit bearing Suit No. 771 of 2024 in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Koil, Aligarh praying for relief of permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants. Dispute in the said case pertain to plot bearing Khata No. 554, Gata No. 1453/1/2 admeasuring 0.3340 hectares, situated at Kasba Koil II, Pargana and Tehsil - Koil, District - Aligarh, where it was alleged that name of plaintiff was registered as Bhoomidhar with transferable rights in the revenue records and interference in peaceful possession by the defendants/respondents was made seeking interference of the trial Court. Alongwith the said suit petitioner had moved an application for grant of interim injunction. It is stated that the trial Court considering the application of the petitioner granted ad-interim injunction on 10.09.20204, directing the parties to maintain status quo over the property in dispute. Notices were also issued to the defendants, to which they put in appearance and opposed grant of ad-interim injunction infavour of the plaintiff-petitioner.

¶9

It is stated that the petitioner had not complied with the mandatory provisions of Order 39 Rule 3 CPC, inasmuch as the entire documents which the plaintiff was required to submit had not been given and the trial Court after examining the evidence on record found the version of defendants to be correct and accordingly allowed their application and set aside its previous order dated 10.09.2024.

¶10

The petitioner being aggrieved by order dated 24.12.2024, whereby ad-interim injunction, granted in favour of plaintiff, had been vacated and which has been assailed in the present writ petition.

¶11

Various grounds have been urged by the petitioner stating that it is incumbent that interim protection be granted to the petitioner during the pendency of suit proceedings, while the respondents on the other hand have opposed the writ petition.

¶12

It is noticed that the respondents-defendants have put in appearance before the trial Court and undisputedly the temporary injunction application filed by the petitioner is still pending consideration and only orders were passed granting ad-interim injunction to the plaintiff-petitioner.

¶13

After arguing the matter up to some length, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the grievance of the petitioner would be sufficiently redressed in case appropriate directions are issued to the trial Court to disposed of petitioner's application for interim injunction with expedition.

¶14

Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to the aforesaid limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶15

In the light of above and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, present writ petition is disposed of with direction to the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Koil, Aligarh to consider and decide petitioner's application 7C2 for interim injunction, on the next date fixed, which, this Court has been apprised that same is fixed as 26.02.2025, and if for some reason, the interim injunction application is not disposed of on the said date due to some legal impediment, the trial Court is directed to dispose of the same within maximum period of three weeks thereafter, in accordance with law by means of reasoned and speaking order.

¶16

The parties undertake to cooperate in the proceedings before the trial Court and they shall not seek any unnecessary adjournments.

¶17

Order Date :- 6.2.2025 A. Verma

¶18

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶19

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Vijay Bhagwati v. Harendra Mittal and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Vijay Bhagwati v. Harendra Mittal and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sumit Saini Constable Armed Police Pno. No. 180710267 and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl . Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and 3 Others

Shashi Kant Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./ Prin. Secy. Minor Irrigation Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Shiv Baran Singh State Vs State of U.P. and Others

Ajay Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko and 2 Others

Shivam Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Jitendra Prakash Pandey and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others