Disposed

Gopal Agrawal v. Nagar Palik Nigam Raipur

Chhattisgarh HC16 Sept 2022WP227/26/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh, in a writ petition challenging an appellate order that set aside a temporary injunction, directed the trial court to dispose of the pending civil suit within six months. The court held that the interim order in favor of the petitioner must remain operative until the final disposal of the suit.

What did the court decide?

Directed the trial court to decide the civil suit within six months while the interim order remains in force.

Gopal Agrawal Vs Nagar Palik Nigam Raipur — Landlord and Tenant | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

Writ Petition (227) No.26 of 2019

¶4

Gopal Agrawal S/o Late Girdhari Agrawal, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Samta Colony, Raipur, Tahsil And District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Nagar Palik Nigam, Raipur, Tahsil And District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶8

Commissioner Nagar Palik Nigam, Raipur, Tahsil And DistrictRaipur, Chhattisgarh

¶9

Nagar Palik Nigam, Raipur , Bazar/Nazul, Raipur Tahsil And District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate.

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Order on Board

16-09-2022

Heard.

The petitioner has filed instant petition against the order passed by the Second Additional District Judge, Raipur, in Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No.67/2016, dated 19.12.2018, whereby the Appeal preferred by the respondent/defendants has been allowed. The Civil Judge, Class-II, Raipur, in Civil Suit No. C.F.C.S. 25A/2016 vide order dated 02.11.2016 had allowed application filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of C.P.C. moved by the plaintiff against which the appeal was preferred.

¶17

-2-

¶18

The Civil Suit filed on 23.09.2016 for mandatory and permanent injunction against the defendants/respondents herein on the ground that the plaintiff is lessee and the defendants/respondents declined to renew the lease granted to the plaintiff after expiry of the lease period.

¶19

From the pleading of the plaint as well as the application moved by the plaintiff under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of C.P.C., it appears that by virtue of the lease deed, the plaintiff was in possession of the suit property, therefore, he moved application for temporary injunction and same was allowed by the learned trial Court vide order dated 02.11.2016.

¶20

Against the order passed by the trial Court that is First Civil Judge, Class-II, Raipur, the respondent/defendants filed Appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(r) of the C.P.C. before the learned District Court and same was allowed vide order dated 19.12.2018.

¶21

The petitioner/plaintiff has challenged the order passed by the Second Additional District Judge, Raipur on the ground that the learned Court below committed illegality in allowing the Appeal preferred by the respondents/defendants as from the documents, it is apparent that the plaintiff was & he is still in possession of the suit property by virtue of the lease and the defendants/respondents have sit over the matter, therefore, the Civil Suit was filed.

¶22

The learned counsel for the respondents/defendants submits that plaintiff does not dispute the fact that the application for renewal of lease deed is still pending before the authorities but he supports

¶23

the order passed by the learned lower appellate Court.

¶24

I have considered the submissions made by the respective parties and perused the records.

¶25

From the records, it is apparent that the interim injunction was granted in favour of the plaintiff by the learned trial Court and later on, same was set aside by the lower appellate Court. This Court vide order dated 14.01.2019 has passed order that the petitioner shall not be dispossessed from the premises and by virtue of this order, the petitioner is still in possession of the suit property.

¶26

Considering the fact that Civil Suit was filed in the year 2016 and the same is still pending, the interim order granted by this Court is operating in favour of the plaintiff/petitioner, therefore, it would be expedient to direct the learned trial Court to decide the Civil Suit within a reasonable time. Therefore, the learned trial Court is directed to decide the Civil Suit preferably within a period of 06 months and as there is interim order operating in favour of the petitioner/plaintiff, it will remain operative till the final disposal of the suit.

¶27

10.With these observation(s)/direction(s), this petition is finally disposed of.

¶28

Sd/(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶29

Monika

Gopal Agrawal v. Nagar Palik Nigam Raipur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopal Agrawal v. Nagar Palik Nigam Raipur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gautam Kurmi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dilip Vs Purnima

Rajkumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Nanda Prasad Gupta Vs Jwakim Lakda and Ors.

Smt. Rukhmani Sakre Vs Virendra Sakre

Ganesh Baghel Vs Smt. Kanti Baghel