Allahabad High Court
Salahuddin vs Islamuddin @ Banne on 11 November, 2024
Author: Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
Bench: Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:176720
Court No. - 9
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 14118 of 2024
Petitioner :- Salahuddin
Respondent :- Islamuddin @ Banne
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mushir Khan
Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
1. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:-
"i. to issue a order or direction, directing the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bijnor to decide the Original Suit No.244/2023 (Salahuddin Vs. Islamuddin @ Banne), in limitation provided under Section-20-C of Specific Relief Act, 1963, pending in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bijnor, and within stipulated period fixed by this Hon'ble Court.
ii. to issue a order or direction, directing the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bijnor to decide the Application dated 31.03.2023 file under Order-39 Rule-1 C.P.C. in Original Suit No.244/2023 (Salahuddin Vs. Islamuddin @ Banne) within stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court."
2. The first prayer made in the writ petition is covered by the decision of Division Bench of this court in Ali Shad Usmani vs. Ali Isteba 2015(2) ADJ 250 (DB) in which the Court has held that no direction can be issued to the sub-ordinate courts for deciding the suit within stipulated period. Relevant portion of the judgment is extracted hereasunder:-
"We are not inclined to issue a direction for the expeditious hearing of a Civil Suit which is pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), District-Azamgarh. It would be most inappropriate to Court to entertain a writ petition under Article 226 and/or under Article 227 of the Constitution simply for the purpose of expediting the hearing of a suit. Such orders, if granted, place a class of litigants, who move the court in a separate and preferential category whereas other cases which may be of similar or greater antiquity and urgency are left to be decided in the normal channel. Hence, any such direction may be issued with the greatest care and circumspection by the High Court otherwise the Civil Courts will be overburdened only with requests for expeditious disposal of suits, which have been expedited by the High Court. Most of the litigants cannot afford the expense of moving the High court and would not, therefore, be in a position to have the benefit of such an order.
Ultimately, it must be left to the judicious exercise of discretion of the concerned Court to determine whether a ground for urgency has been made out. We emphasize that there may be other cases such as involving senior citizens, those who are differently abled or people suffering from a particular disablilty socio-economic or otherwise which may prime cause of urgent disposal. It is for the learned Trial Judge in each case to apply his or her mind and decide whether the hearing of the suit to be expedited.
For these reasons, we are not inclined to entertain the petition. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to cost."
3. In view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Ali Shad Usmani (supra), this Court declines to grant the prayer no.(i) as prayed for.
4. As far as the relief no.(ii) is concerned, this Court, without calling for counter affidavit or issuing notice to private respondents, directs the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bijnor to decide the temporary injunction application (6-C) dated 31.03.2023 filed in Suit No.244 of 2023, in accordance with law, after hearing all affected parties, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
5. With the aforesaid direction, present writ petition stands disposed of.
6. It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated the case on merit.
Order Date :- 11.11.2024
Kushal
