Ramesh Chandra vs Smt. Raj Kumari And Another
2026 Latest Caselaw 589 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Ramesh Chandra vs Smt. Raj Kumari And Another on 31 March, 2026

Author: Alok Mathur

Bench: Alok Mathur

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2026:AHC-LKO:22522
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
LUCKNOW 
 
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1485 of 2026   
 
   Ramesh Chandra    
 
  .....Petitioner(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   Smt. Raj Kumari And Another    
 
  .....Respondent(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Petitioner(s)   
 
:   
 
Ajay Kumar Pandey   
 
  
 
Counsel for Respondent(s)   
 
:   
 
 
 
   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 5
 
   
 
 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J.      

1. Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, 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 a prayer has been made for expeditious disposal of petitioner's application for stay/interim relief under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC, pending in Civil Suit No. 1058 of 2024 - Ramesh Chandra Vs. Raj Kumari and Others, before Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Haveli, Faizabad.

4. It is urged that though the matter is being listed but for one reason or the other, the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC is not decided.

5. After arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for petitioner submits that grievance of petitioner shall be substantially redressed in case trial Court may be directed to decide the application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC in a time bound manner.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also noticing the extracts of the order sheet, which has been brought on record, this Court is of the opinion that no gainful purpose will be served in keeping the petition pending, rather ends of justice can be served by permitting the petitioner to approach the Court concerned by moving a fresh application for early consideration of the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC, in case if such an application is moved, the Court concerned shall take note of the Circular No. 24/Admin. 'G-II' dated 16.08.2017, passed on the administrative side regarding the disposal of the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC, wherein it has been stated that all the subordinate Courts must ensure to dispose of applications of interim injunction within six months, failing which they shall have to record reasons in the order sheet.

7. 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 plaintiff-petitioner to approach the trial Court and move an appropriate application along with the order passed by this Court, if such an application is moved, the trial Court shall take note of it and pass appropriate orders in the light of the Court?s Circular letter dated 16.08.2017.

8. 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.

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

(Alok Mathur,J.)

March 31, 2026

A. Verma