Indrajeet v. Civil Judge S.D. Court No. 2 Dist. Hardoi and 4 Others

Allahabad HC4 Nov 2025A227/6387/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Article 227 supervision petition; direction to subordinate civil judge; expeditious/early disposal of suit; fixing short dates; aged litigants (petitioner 83, respondent no. 2 over 90); Hardoi; Mool Vad/O.S. No. 232 san 2018; partition/division of property; suit at additional written-reply stage; deletion of wrongly impleaded trial court from respondent array; petition disposed (not dismissed); single-judge bench (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.); no precedent cited.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with direction to Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 2, District Hardoi to fix short dates and ensure expeditious, law-conformant disposal of Mool Vad (O.S.) No. 232 san 2018; permission granted to delete the mistakenly impleaded trial court from the respondent array and amend the petition forthwith. ¶¶14

Indrajeet Vs Civil Judge S.D. Court No. 2 Dist… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether the High Court, acting under Article 227, should direct the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 2, District Hardoi to dispose of Mool Vad (Original Suit) No. 232 san 2018 (a property-partition suit filed 04-04-2018, pending at the additional-written-reply stage, with an 83-year-old petitioner and a respondent no. 2 aged over 90) at the earliest.

¶¶13

Court's answer

The petition is disposed of with a direction that the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 2, District Hardoi ensure expeditious, law-conformant disposal of Mool Vad (Original Suit) No. 232 san 2018 by fixing short dates.

¶¶17

Ratio / Principle

Having been informed by counsel that the trial court was mistakenly made an opposite party in the petition, the court permitted removal of the court's name from the array of respondents on oral request, directing counsel to incorporate the desired amendment in the petition immediately.

¶¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 17 — MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. 6387 of 2025, decided November 4, 2025 by Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi, J. Petitioner Indrajeet (now 83 years old) sought a direction under Article 227 of the Indian Constitution to Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 2, District Hardoi for early disposal of Mool Vad (Original Suit) No. 232 san 2018, a property-partition suit filed on 4/4/2018 in which the opposite parties had filed written replies and the suit was pending at the stage of additional written replies; respondent no. 2 is over 90 years old. Holding speedy disposal necessary in the interest of justice, the court disposed of the petition with a direction to the Civil Judge to fix short dates and ensure expeditious, law-conformant disposal of the suit. As counsel had mistakenly impleaded the trial court as an opposite party, the court permitted its name to be removed from the respondent array and required the amendment to be incorporated in the petition immediately.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6387 of 2025

Indrajeet

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

Civil Judge S.D. Court No. 2 Dist. Hardoi And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Priyanshu Awasthi Counsel for Respondent(s) :

¶7

Court No. - 17

¶8

HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.

¶9

यािचकाकतार् के िवद्वान अिधवक्ता श्री िप्रयांशु अवस्थी को सुना।

¶10

यािचकाकतार् के िवद्वान अिधवक्ता ने कहा िक उन्होंने त्रुिटवश िवचारण न्यायालय को यािचका में िवपक्षी बना िदया है तथा उनके मौिखक अनुरोध पर न्यायालय का नाम िवपक्षीगण से हटाने की अनुमित दी जाती है। यािचकाकतार् के िवद्वान अिधवक्ता वांिछत संशोधन यािचका में तुरन्त समावेिशत करें।

¶11

भारतीय संिवधान के अनुच्छेद 227 के अंतगर्त प्रस्तुत यािचका द्वारा यािचकाकतार् ने िसिवल जज (प्रवर खंड), कक्ष संख्या 2, जनपद हरदोई को मूल वाद संख्या 232 सन 2018 के शीघ्र िनस्तारण का िनदेर्श देने का अनुरोध िकया है।

¶12

उपरोक्त वाद यािचकाकतार् ने संपित्त के िवभाजन हेतु िदनांक 4/4/2018 को प्रस्तुत िकया था। िवपक्षीगण वाद में उपिस्थत होकर प्रितवाद पत्र प्रस्तुत कर चुके हैं तथा वतर्मान में वाद अितिरक्त प्रितवाद पत्र प्रस्तुत करने के स्तर पर लंिबत है। इस मध्य यािचकाकतार् की आयु 83 वषर् की हो गई है तथा प्रितवादी संख्या 2, 90 वषर् से अिधक की अवस्था प्राप्त कर स्वगर्वासी हो चुकी है।

¶13

ऐसी पिरिस्थित में वाद का शीघ्र िनस्तारण न्यायिहत में आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है।

¶14

तदनुसार, यािचका िनस्तािरत की जाती है तथा यह िनदेर्श िदया जाता है

¶15

A227 No. 6387 of 2025

¶16

¶17

िक िसिवल जज (प्रवर खंड), कक्ष संख्या 2, जनपद हरदोई, मूल वाद संख्या 232 सन 2018 का िनस्तारण लघु ितिथयां िनयत करते हुए िविधनुशार शीघ्रतापूवर्क करना सुिनिश्चत करें।

¶18

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

¶19

November 4, 2025

¶20

Himanshu

¶21

Digitally signed by :- HIMANSHU SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Indrajeet v. Civil Judge S.D. Court No. 2 Dist. Hardoi and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indrajeet v. Civil Judge S.D. Court No. 2 Dist. Hardoi and 4 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

Vinay Kumar and Another Vs Gareebe and 2 Others

Sheshram Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Dist. Magistrate Shrawasti and 5 Others

Sarla Devi @ Sarla Rathaur Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and 7 Others

Shyam Sundar vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Civil Supplies Govt. Lko. and 6 Others

Ram Chandra @ Ram Chandar vs Devta Prasad and 3 Others

Arun Kumar Chubey @ Arun Kumar Chaturvedi vs Anil Kumar Maurya