Amit Kumar v. Sri Chandrika Prasad Singh (Died) and 6 Others

Allahabad HC3 Apr 2025A227/2989/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Article 227 writ, Allahabad HC (Agarwal, J.), 03-04-2025: expedite disposal of substitution application 234/2021 (Order VI Rule 17 CPC) and amendment application 234/2021 therein, pending in Original Suit 548/1987 before Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) Fast Track, Varanasi; three-month directive; disposed at admission stage; no counter affidavit/notice; matter expressly not adjudicated on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction upon Civil Judge (Senior Division), Fast Track, Varanasi to decide the pending substitution application and the amendment application filed therein, arising out of Original Suit No. 548 of 1987, in accordance with law, after hearing all affected parties, preferably within three months from production of a certified copy of the order; no merits adjudication by this Court. ¶¶10

Amit Kumar vs Sri Chandrika Prasad Singh (Died)… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶10

Issue for consideration

Whether the Civil Judge (Sr. Division) Fast Track, Varanasi should be directed to dispose of, expeditiously, the substitution application No. 234 of 2021 and the amendment application filed therein, both pending in Original Suit No. 548 of 1987.

¶¶8

Court's answer

The Court disposed of the writ petition at the admission stage, without calling for a counter affidavit or issuing notice to the private respondents.

¶¶9

Ratio / Principle

A direction was issued upon the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Fast Track, Varanasi to decide both the pending substitution application and the amendment application filed therein, arising out of Original Suit No. 548 of 1987, in accordance with law, after hearing all affected parties.

¶¶9

Key takeaways

The two applications are to be decided preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.ratio¶¶9
The Court expressly clarified that it has not adjudicated the matter on merits.obiter¶¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. 2989 of 2025 — Amit Kumar v. Sri Chandrika Prasad Singh (Died) & 6 Others (High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Court No. 9; Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal, J.; order dated 3.4.2025). The writ petition solely prayed for expeditious disposal of Substitution application No.234 of 2021, filed under Order VI Rule 17 of C.P.C., and Amendment Application No.234/2021 filed in that substitution application, both pending in Original Suit No.548 of 1987 (Rajendra Prasad Srivastav and others Vs. Mirza Rafiuddin and others) before the Civil Judge (Sr. Division) Fast Track, Varanasi. Disposed of at the admission stage, without counter affidavit or notice to private respondents: the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Fast Track, Varanasi was directed to decide both applications in accordance with law, after hearing all affected parties, preferably within three months from production of a certified copy of the order. The Court expressly stated that it had not adjudicated the matter on merits.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:46431

¶2

Court No. - 9

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2989 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Amit Kumar Respondent :- Sri Chandrika Prasad Singh (Died) And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Gyanu Shukla

¶5

Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶6

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

¶7

"I. direct the Civil Judge (Sr. Division) Fast Track, Varanasi to decide the Substitution application No.234 of 2021 (Rajendra Prasad Srivastava (died) and others Vs. Chandrika Prasad (died) and others) filed under Order VI Rule 17 of C.P.C. as well as Amendment Application No.234/2021 filed in the substitution application arising out of Original Suit No.548 of 1987 (Rajendra Prasad Srivastav and others Vs. Mirza Rafiuddin and others)."

¶8

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that a substitution application is pending consideration in Original Suit No. 548 of 1987 and an amendment application has also been filed in the said substitution application which is also pending consideration. The sole prayer made is for expeditious disposal of both substitution application as well as amendment application.

¶9

As no useful purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending, the writ petition is being disposed of, at the admission stage, without calling for counter affidavit or issuing notice to private respondents, with a direction upon Civil Judge (Senior Division), Fast Track, Varanasi to decide both substitution application as well as amendment application filed in the said substitution application arising out of Original Suit No. 548 of 1987, in accordance with law, after hearing all affected parties, preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶10

With the aforesaid directions, writ petition stands disposed of.

¶11

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

¶12

Order Date :- 3.4.2025 V.S.Singh

¶13

Digitally signed by :- VIDYA SAGAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Amit Kumar v. Sri Chandrika Prasad Singh (Died) and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar v. Sri Chandrika Prasad Singh (Died) and 6 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

Similar cases

Suresh Kumar vs District Election Officer, Ghaziabad and 2 Others

Trust Baba Munshidas, Nari, Mauja Gurha, Pargana and Tehsil- Fatehabad District- Agra and Another vs Satish Singh and 5 Others

Dwarikanath and 5 Others vs Rajbahadur and Another

Tahir Hussain and 2 Other vs Taufiq Ahamad and 12 Other

Pankaj Dubey vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Sri Avinash Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. and 2 Others