Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MANISH MATHUR, J.
Ram Sagar – Petitioner
Versus
Civil Judge (S. D.), Court No. 15, Sultanpur And 6 Others – Respondents
Matters Under Article 227 No. 402 Of 2023
Decided On : 30-01-2023
Constitution of India,1950 – Article, 227 – Every High Court shall have superintendence over all courts and tribunals throughout the territories interrelation to which it exercises jurisdiction – Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned State Counsel for opposite parties learned counsel for opposite party In view of order being passed, notices to opposite party stands dispensed with – Petition has been filed under Article of Constitution of India seeking a direction to court concerned for expeditious disposal of Application for temporary injunction pending in Original Suit filed by petitioner for permanent injunction – Held, Considering submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material on record, it appears that aforesaid suit has been filed in which application for temporary injunction is pending since year – In view of aforesaid, Civil Judge Court is directed to decide Application for Temporary Injunction pending in Original Suit expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks from date notices are served upon defendants – Petition disposed.
JUDGMENT :
[Manish Mathur, J.]
1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned State Counsel for opposite parties 1 to 6 and Mr. Mohan Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.7. In view of order being passed, notices to opposite party no.1 stands dispensed with.
2. Petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to court concerned for expeditious disposal of Application for temporary injunction pending in Original Suit No.847 of 2022 filed by petitioner for permanent injunction.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner was allotted lease/licence over the property in question which is being interfered with by the defendants due to which several trees in the disputed property has already been felled. As such, temporary injunction is required to be granted in order to preserve the suit property.
4. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material on record, it appears that aforesaid suit has been filed in which application for temporary injunction is pending since year 2022. It however does not appear as to whether the defendants have put in appearance or filed their objection or not.
5. In view of aforesaid, the Civil Judge (S. D.), Court No. 15, Sultanpur is directed to decide Application for Temporary Injunction dated 27.09.2022 pending in Original Suit No.847 of 2022 (Nankau and other v. State of U.P. and others) expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date notices are served upon the defendants.
6. Benefit of this order shall be available to petitioner only in case he cooperates in early disposal of the proceedings.
7. With aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.
The High Court affirmed that temporary injunctions can grant relief akin to final orders in urgent scenarios, upholding prior judgments and property ownership without jurisdictional errors.
The court emphasized the necessity of full disclosure when seeking injunctive relief within property disputes.
The court clarified that to obtain a temporary injunction, a party must demonstrate irreparable harm, a favorable balance of convenience, and a prima facie case even without physical possession.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
