Disposed¶9

Gulab Singh v. Nagar Panchayat

Allahabad HC5 Mar 2025A227/2159/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gulab Singh v. Nagar Panchayat; Matters Under Article 227 No. 2159 of 2025; High Court of Judicature at Allahabad; Rohit Ranjan Agarwal, J.; order dated 04.04.2025; neutral citation 2025:AHC:47493; expeditious disposal of civil suit; Original Suit No. 851 of 1990; ex parte decree set aside; Order IX Rule 13 CPC; Order XLIII Rule 1 (d) CPC; suit restored; Ali Shad Usmani vs. Ali Isteba, 2015 (2) ADJ 250 (DB) distinguished on facts; one-year timeline from certified copy; no adjournments; no adjudication on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the court below to expedite Original Suit No. 851 of 1990 and decide it in accordance with law, after hearing all affected parties, without granting unnecessary adjournments to either party, preferably within one year from the date of production of certified copy of the order. ¶9

Gulab Singh vs Nagar Panchayat — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶9

Issue for consideration

Whether the court below should be directed to expedite the disposal of Original Suit No. 851 of 1990, pending since 1990. +1 more

¶6

Court's answer

Despite the Division Bench ruling in Ali Shad Usmani vs. Ali Isteba, 2015 (2) ADJ 250 (DB) that no separate class of litigants can be created and no such expedition directions issued, on the facts (suit of 1990 pending almost 35 years) the court below is directed to expedite Original Suit No. 851 of 1990 and decide it in accordance with law, after hearing all affected parties, without granting unnecessary adjournments to either party, preferably within one year from production of certified copy of the order.

¶8

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid directions; the Court has expressly not adjudicated the matter on merits.

¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Art. 227) - Plaintiff's petition seeking expeditious disposal of Original Suit No. 851 of 1990. Suit filed 1990, decreed ex parte 1992; defendant's Order IX Rule 13 CPC application dismissed 2022; misc. appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1 (d) CPC allowed on 12.07.2024 setting aside the ex parte decree and restoring the suit, which remains undecided. Though the Division Bench in Ali Shad Usmani vs. Ali Isteba, 2015 (2) ADJ 250 (DB) held that no separate class of litigants can be created and no directions for expeditious disposal of civil cases can be issued, the Court, noting almost 35 years' pendency, directed the court below to expedite the suit and decide it in accordance with law after hearing all affected parties, without unnecessary adjournments, preferably within one year from production of certified copy of the order. Writ petition disposed of; no adjudication on merits.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:47493

¶2

Court No. - 9

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2159 of 2025 Petitioner :- Gulab Singh Respondent :- Nagar Panchayat Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶5

This is a plaintiff's petition.

¶6

The suit filed by the plaintiff in the year 1990 was decreed exparte in the year 1992. Against the ex- parte decree, an application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC was moved by the defendant which was dismissed in the year 2022, against which, misc. appeal was filed under Order XLIII Rule 1 (d) CPC which has been allowed by the order dated 12.07.2024 and the suit has been restored to its original number. The prayer made in the writ petition is for expeditious disposal of the Suit No.851 of 1990.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that once the appeal was allowed and the ex-parte decree was set aside, the suit has been restored to its original number which is pending consideration and it has not been decided till date.

¶8

Though the Division Bench of this Court in case of Ali Shad Usmani vs. Ali Isteba, 2015 (2) ADJ 250 (DB) had held that no separate class can be created amongst the litigants and no such direction can be issued for expeditious disposal of civil cases but looking to the facts of the case, as the civil suit was filed way back in the year 1990 and almost 35 years have elapsed, the court below is hereby directed to expedite the proceedings of Original Suit No.851 of 1990 and proceed with the matter and decide the same, in accordance with law, after hearing all affected parties without granting any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties, preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶9

With the aforesaid directions, writ petition stands disposed of.

¶10

It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated the matter on merits.

¶11

Order Date :- 4.4.2025 SK Goswami

¶12

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

Gulab Singh v. Nagar Panchayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gulab Singh v. Nagar Panchayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rajeev Kumar Gupta and Another vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Sushila @ Sheela and Another vs Sulochana and 3 Others

Bhullu vs Ram Bahadur and Another

Rohit Tripathi the Manager of Committee of Management of Shri Shakti Vidyapeeth Junior High School vs Sri Pratap Singh Baghel at Present Posted as the Director (Basic Education) U.P. Vidya Bhawan Nisha

Ashok Kumar Mishra and Another vs Smt. Phool Kali and 14 Others

Lalit Kumar vs Smt. Ritu Verma