Disposed¶12

Mohd Laik and 2 Others v. Mohd Jahid

Allahabad HC18 Mar 2026A227/3405/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Article 227 petition; interim injunction; appellate court stay of injunction; expeditious disposal of appeal; twelve-week timeline; status quo direction; Additional District Judge Court No. 1 Bareilly; Mohd Laik v. Mohd Jahid; Allahabad High Court; decision dated March 19, 2026.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with direction to the appellate court (Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, District- Bareilly) to consider and decide the appeal expeditiously, preferably within twelve weeks from the date of production of certified copy of the order, after hearing all the parties concerned, provided there is no other legal impediment; both parties to maintain status quo till disposal of the appeal. ¶12

Mohd Laik and 2 Others Vs Mohd Jahid — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3405 of 2026

¶2

Mohd Laik And 2 Others

¶3

.....Petitioner(s)

¶4

Versus

¶5

Mohd Jahid	.....Respond
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Dileep Kumar Yadav, Yash Padia
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Sanjeev Kumar Mishra

¶6

.....Respondent(s)

¶7

Court No. - 5

¶8

HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.

¶9

This petition has been filed challenging the order dated 13.01.2026 passed by the appellate court. Trial court by order dated 18.12.2025 granted an interim injunction in favor of the plaintiff-petitioners. The defendant-respondent filed an appeal in which the order dated 13.01.2026 was passed staying the operation of interim injunction order granted by the trial court.

¶10

Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that in the garb of interim injunction order, the plaintiff-petitioners started interfering with the possession of the defendant over the property in dispute and therefore, the appellate court has rightly stayed the operation of interim injunction order. It has also been submitted that the appeal is pending consideration before the court below.

¶11

Since the appeal is pending, no useful purpose would be served in keeping this petition pending.

¶12

Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of with direction to the appellate court i.e. Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, District- Bareilly to consider and decide the appeal expeditiously, preferably within a period of twelve weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order, after hearing all the parties concerned, provided there is no other legal impediment.

¶13

Till the disposal of the appeal, both the parties are directed to maintain status quo.

¶14

March 19, 2026 Nitika Sri.

¶15

(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)

¶16

Digitally signed by :- NITIKA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohd Laik and 2 Others v. Mohd Jahid

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Laik and 2 Others v. Mohd Jahid

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

Smt. Hadisunnisha Vs Degree College Association and 6 Others

Mohd. Yakub and Others Vs Board of Revenue and Others

Sri. Amar Sahu and Another Vs Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claim Tribunal and 3 Others

Parvej Alam Vs Smt. Mahe Aasmin

Anil Kumar Vs Mahendra Prasad and 4 Others

Bandana @ Bandana Chauhan and Another Vs Phoolchandra and 2 Others