[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Allahabad High Court
Harish Suri vs Dr. Sushil Suri And 3 Others on 15 April, 2026
Author: Saurabh Lavania
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Neutral Citation No. - 2026:AHC-LKO:25804
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1589 of 2026
Harish Suri
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Dr. Sushil Suri And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)
:
Nandita Bharti
Counsel for Respondent(s)
:
Court No. - 7
HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J.
1. Vakalatnama filed by Shri Tanay Hazari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party nos. 3 and 4, is taken on record.
2. Notices to other opposite parties is dispensed with in view of orders proposed to be passed.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties who are present before this Court.
4. The present petition has been filed seeking following main relief(s) :- "A. Issue an appropriate order or direction commanding the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 43, Lucknow to proceed with the hearing of Regular Suit No. 1364 of 2012 (Dr. Sushil Suri vs Harish Suri and others) along with Suit No. 342/2015(Dr Sushil Suri vs Harish Suri And Others) on day-to-day basis without granting unnecessary adjournments and to conclude the proceedings within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.
B. Issue a direction to the learned trial court to decide all pending interlocutory applications in Regular Suit No. 1364 of 2012 (Dr. Sushil Suri vs Harish Suri and others) and Suit No. 342/2015(Dr Sushil Suri vs Harish Suri And Others) expeditiously within a short period, preferably within a week to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court."
5. Considered the facts pleaded in the present petition, including the facts based on the order of the Hon'ble Apex Court dated 08.08.2017 passed in Special Leave to Appeal(C) No. 18771 of 2017 (Sushilasuri Vs. Sushilpuri and another), wherein the Hon'ble Apex court observed that," the Trial Court is requested to expedite the case expeditiously" as also the order of this Court dated 19.11.2024 passed in Matters under Article 227 No. 5475 of 2024 (Harish Suri Vs. Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 43, Lucknow and Another), wherein this Court observed that "the pending suit shall be positively decided with all expedition without granting any unnecessary adjournment within a period of one year".
6. Also considered the judgment of the Ho'ble Apex Court in the case of Yashpal Jain Vs. Sushila Devi and others; 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1377, particularly paragraph 47, which reads as under:-
"47. The following directions are issued:
i. All courts at district and taluka levels shall ensure proper execution of the summons and in a time bound manner as prescribed under Order V Rule (2) of CPC and same shall be monitored by Principal District Judges and after collating the statistics they shall forward the same to be placed before the committee constituted by the High Court for its consideration and monitoring.
ii. All courts at District and Taluka level shall ensure that written statement is filed within the prescribed limit namely as prescribed under Order VIII Rule 1 and preferably within 30 days and to assign reasons in writing as to why the time limit is being extended beyond 30 days as indicated under proviso to sub-Rule (1) of Order VIII of CPC.
iii. All courts at Districts and Talukas shall ensure after the pleadings are complete, the parties should be called upon to appear on the day fixed as indicated in Order X and record the admissions and denials and the court shall direct the parties to the suit to opt for either mode of the settlement outside the court as specified in sub-Section (1) of Section 89 and at the option of the parties shall fix the date of appearance before such forum or authority and in the event of the parties opting to any one of the modes of settlement directions be issued to appear on the date, time and venue fixed and the parties shall so appear before such authority/forum without any further notice at such designated place and time and it shall also be made clear in the reference order that trial is fixed beyond the period of two months making it clear that in the event of ADR not being fruitful, the trial would commence on the next day so fixed and would proceed on day-to-day basis.
iv. In the event of the party's failure to opt for ADR namely resolution of dispute as prescribed under Section 89(1) the court should frame the issues for its determination within one week preferably, in the open court.
v. Fixing of the date of trial shall be in consultation with the learned advocates appearing for the parties to enable them to adjust their calendar. Once the date of trial is fixed, the trial should proceed accordingly to the extent possible, on day-to-day basis.
vi. Learned trial judges of District and Taluka Courts shall as far as possible maintain the diary for ensuring that only such number of cases as can be handled on any given day for trial and complete the recording of evidence so as to avoid overcrowding of the cases and as a sequence of it would result in adjournment being sought and thereby preventing any inconvenience being caused to the stakeholders.
vii. The counsels representing the parties may be enlightened of the provisions of Order XI and Order XII so as to narrow down the scope of dispute and it would be also the onerous responsibility of the Bar Associations and Bar Councils to have periodical refresher courses and preferably by virtual mode.
viii. The trial courts shall scrupulously, meticulously and without fail comply with the provisions of Rule 1 of Order XVII and once the trial has commenced it shall be proceeded from day to day as contemplated under the proviso to Rule (2).
ix. The courts shall give meaningful effect to the provisions for payment of cost for ensuring that no adjournment is sought for procrastination of the litigation and the opposite party is suitably compensated in the event of such adjournment is being granted.
x. At conclusion of trial the oral arguments shall be heard immediately and continuously and judgment be pronounced within the period stipulated under Order XX of CPC.
xi. The statistics relating to the cases pending in each court beyond 5 years shall be forwarded by every presiding officer to the Principal District Judge once in a month who (Principal District Judge/District Judge) shall collate the same and forward it to the review committee constituted by the respective High Courts for enabling it to take further steps.
xii. The Committee so constituted by the Hon'ble Chief Justice of the respective States shall meet at least once in two months and direct such corrective measures to be taken by concerned court as deemed fit and shall also monitor the old cases (preferably which are pending for more than 05 years) constantly."
7. This Court also considered the recent judgment passed in the case of Shaikh Uzma Feroz Hussain Vs The State of Maharastra passed in Writ Petition (s) (Criminal) No. 587 of 2023, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court observed as under:-
"We are of the view that since every High Court and every court in the country has a huge pendency, the constitutional court should avoid temptation of fixing a time-bound schedule for disposal of any case before any court unless the situation is extra ordinary."
8. Considering the aforesaid as also the fact that the suit in issue filed in the year 2012 is at the final stage, the present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move an appropriate application for expeditious disposal of the suit before the concerned trial court indicating therein all the relevant facts within next two weeks. The trial court is directed to consider and decide the same within three weeks thereafter in accordance with law and in case the trial court is of the view that a case for expediting the matter is made out, appropriate orders shall be passed thereupon.
9. With the aforesaid observations, the present petition is disposed of.
(Saurabh Lavania,J.)
April 15, 2026
Preeti
