Disposed¶15

Chhabinath v. Satish Kumar Yadav and 9 Others

Allahabad HC18 Feb 2026A227/2127/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Article 227 petition, Allahabad High Court, expeditious disposal of civil suit, Original Suit No. 3014 of 2023, Civil Judge (Senior Division) Prayagraj, written statement, framing of issues, injunction objections, report called from trial court, Registrar (Compliance), listed fresh 16.04.2026, order dated February 18, 2026, Kshitij Shailendra, J.

What did the court decide?

Interim directions only: the concerned trial court to submit a report on the failure to indicate dates for written statement/framing of issues and on the stage of the suit; Registrar (Compliance) to communicate the order to the court concerned; case listed fresh on 16.04.2026. Petition not finally decided. ¶15

Chhabinath vs Satish Kumar Yadav and 9 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether the High Court should intervene under Article 227 to secure expeditious disposal of Original Suit No. 3014 of 2023 pending before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), court no. 14, Prayagraj, where the trial court has not indicated dates for filing written statement and framing of issues.

¶11

Court's answer

On a perusal of the order sheet, except for indications about objections, if any, in the injunction matter, the trial court prima facie appears to have omitted to indicate the dates for filing written statement and for framing of issues.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

The concerned court is directed to submit a report regarding the omission and also about the stage of the suit.

¶13

Key takeaways

The matter is to be listed as fresh on 16.04.2026.ratio¶14
Registrar (Compliance) is directed to send a copy of the order to the court concerned for compliance.ratio¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Kshitij Shailendra, J.) in a petition under Article 227 seeking expeditious disposal of Original Suit No. 3014 of 2023 (Chhabinath and others vs. Satish Kumar Yadav and others), pending before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), court no. 14, Prayagraj, observed from the order sheet that, save for indications regarding objections in the injunction matter, the trial court prima facie appeared to have forgotten to indicate dates for filing the written statement and for framing of issues. The Court called for a report from the concerned court on the omission and on the stage of the suit, directed the Registrar (Compliance) to send a copy of the order to the court concerned for compliance, and listed the matter as fresh on 16.04.2026.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2127 of 2026

Chhabinath

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

Satish Kumar Yadav And 9 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s) Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Anand Swarup, Jai Singh Yadav :

¶9

Court No. - 5

¶10

HON'BLE KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA, J.

¶11

This petition has been filed seeking expeditious disposal of Original Suit No. 3014 of 2023 (Chhabinath and others vs. Satish Kumar Yadav and others) pending in the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), court no. 14, Prayagraj.

¶12

A perusal of order sheet indicates that except indicating about objections, if any, in the injunction matter, the trial court prima facie appears to have forgotten to indicate the dates for filing written statement and for framing of issues.

¶13