Vijay Prakash And Another vs Radhey Shyam And 4 Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 18039 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Vijay Prakash And Another vs Radhey Shyam And 4 Others on 20 May, 2024

Author: Ajit Kumar

Bench: Ajit Kumar

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:90571
 
Court No. - 4
 

 
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6318 of 2024
 

 
Petitioner :- Vijay Prakash And Another
 
Respondent :- Radhey Shyam And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Nagendra Kumar Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
 

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

2. By means of this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution, petitioner wants expeditious disposal of Execution Case No. 2 of 2020 (Small Case No. 8/2003, Old Original Suit No. 1241 of 1971) Vijay Prakash and another Vs Radhey Shyam and others, pending before Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kushinagar at Padrauna.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that defendants have yet not appeared and execution case proceeding ex parte.

4. In view of the above, following directions are issued:

i. The trial court concerned is directed to decide the aforesaid execution case within a period of four months from the date of production of certified copy of this order;

ii. In the event judgment debtor appears and file recall application in respect of order proceeding ex parte, the trial court shall first dispose of the said application within a month.

iii. In the event order to proceed ex parte is recalled, the executing court shall permit the judgment debtor to file objections within three weeks and shall decide the same first within a month thereafter. After deciding the objections, if execution case survives, the executing court shall decide the same within a further period of two months. However, in the event no recall application is filed or recall application is dismissed, the executing court shall proceed to decide the case as directed in para (i) above.

5. It is, however, clarified that in the event trial court is not able to decide the suit for any technical reason, such delay in disposal of the suit and pendency thereof shall ordinarily not be a ground sufficient enough to fasten the officer concerned with any personal liability of contempt.

6. With the aforesaid observation, this petition stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 20.5.2024

IrfanUddin