Surendra Yadav vs Prin. Judge Family Court Pratapgrah ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 526 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Surendra Yadav vs Prin. Judge Family Court Pratapgrah ... on 26 March, 2026

Author: Alok Mathur

Bench: Alok Mathur

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2026:AHC-LKO:21728
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
LUCKNOW 
 
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1028 of 2026   
 
   Surendra Yadav    
 
  .....Petitioner(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   Prin. Judge Family Court Pratapgrah Distt. Pratapgrah And Another    
 
  .....Respondent(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Petitioner(s)   
 
:   
 
Anil Kumar Yadav, Anil Kumar Tiwari, Harsh Kumar   
 
  
 
Counsel for Respondent(s)   
 
:   
 
 
 
   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 5
 
   
 
 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J.       

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. In view of the proposed order notice to private respondents is dispensed with.

3. By means of the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India prayer has been made for direction to Principal Judge, Family Court, Pratapgarh for expeditious disposal of Case No. 7 of 2025 (Surendra Yadav vs Preeti Yadav).

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance of the petitioner would be sufficiently met in case Principal Judge, Family Court, Pratapgarh, considers and decides the aforesaid case in the time bound manner.

5. At this stage, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the Court concerned and move an appropriate application detailing urgency for expeditious disposal of Case No. 7 of 2025, along with the order passed by this Court, within two weeks from today, and in case, if such an application is moved, the Court/Authority shall consider and decide the same within three weeks thereafter, and in case, any case for urgency is made out by the petitioner, it shall pass appropriate orders thereupon, and proceed in accordance with law.

6. It is made clear that this Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merit and the Court concerned shall decide the matter strictly in accordance with law.

7. With the aforesaid observations, the petition is disposed of.

(Alok Mathur,J.)

March 26, 2026

J. K. Dinkar