Disposed¶20

Dayashanker Pandey v. Estate of Late Umanshankar Pandey

Allahabad HC25 Nov 2025A227/6869/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Article 227; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; expeditious disposal / expedition direction; Misc. Case No.7 of 2024 (NR); Additional District Judge/Fast Track Court, Sultanpur; Dayashanker Pandey v. Estate of Late Umanshankar Pandey; no unnecessary adjournment; no legal impediment; merits not examined; notice to private-respondent dispensed with; standing counsel no objection; disposed of November 25, 2025; single bench Jaspreet Singh, J.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Additional District Judge/Fast Track Court, Sultanpur to finally decide Misc. Case No.7 of 2024 (NR) as expeditiously as possible without granting unnecessary adjournments, without examining merits. ¶20

Dayashanker Pandey Vs Estate of Late Umanshankar… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the High Court should direct the Additional District Judge/Fast Track Court, Sultanpur to finally decide the pending Misc. Case No.7 of 2024 (NR) expeditiously.

¶13

Court's answer

Directed the Additional District Judge/Fast Track Court, Sultanpur to consider and finally decide the pending proceedings of Misc. Case No.7 of 2024 (NR) as expeditiously as possible, affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties but without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either party, provided there is no legal impediment.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

The Court did not examine the case of either party on merits; the authority concerned shall be free to decide the matter strictly in accordance with law.

¶16

Key takeaways

Notice to private-respondent No.1 was dispensed with in view of the order proposed to be passed.¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Article 227 (Matters Under Article 227 No. 6869 of 2025, Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench; Jaspreet Singh, J., November 25, 2025): Petitioner Dayashanker Pandey sought expeditious disposal of his Misc. Case No.7 of 2024 (NR), Dayashankar Pandey Vs. Estate of Late Umashankar Pandey, pending before the Additional District Judge/Fast Track Court, Sultanpur. Notice to private-respondent No.1 dispensed with; learned standing counsel raised no objection. The Court held that ends of justice would be served by directing the trial court to consider and finally decide the pending proceedings as expeditiously as possible, affording full opportunity of hearing but without unnecessary adjournments, provided there is no legal impediment. It was made clear that the Court had not examined the merits of either party's case and the authority concerned remains free to decide strictly in accordance with law. Petition disposed of.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6869 of 2025

Dayashanker Pandey

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

Estate Of Late Umanshankar Pandey

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Devansh Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) :

¶9

Court No. - 6

¶10

HON'BLE JASPREET SINGH, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶12

In view of the order proposed to be passed by this Court, notice to the private-respondent No.1 is dispensed with.

¶13

By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks expeditious disposal of his Misc. Case No.7 of 2024 (NR), Dayashankar Pandey Vs. Estate of Late Umashankar Pandey, pending before the Additional District Judge/Fast Track Court, Sultanpur.

¶14

Learned standing counsel submits that he has no objection in case an expedite order is passed.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that no gainful purpose will be served in keeping the aforesaid petition pending rather ends of justice can be served by directing the Additional District Judge/Fast Track Court, Sultanpur to consider and finally decide the pending proceedings of Misc. Case No.7 of 2024 (NR), Dayashankar Pandey Vs. Estate of Late Umashankar Pandey as expeditiously as possible affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties, but without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties provided there is no legal impediment.

¶16

It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merits and the authority concerned shall be free to decide the

¶17

A227 No. 6869 of 2025

¶18

¶19

matter strictly in accordance with law.

¶20

With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of .

¶21

(Jaspreet Singh,J.)

¶22