UMANATH SITARAM THAKURversusMANOJBHAI VIRENDRAPRAAPSINGH RAJPUT
- Disposal
- 56-DISPOSED AT ADMISSION STAGE
- Bench
- MAULIK SHELAT
Holding
The High Court directed the trial court to hear and decide the injunction application within three months, but left the expediting of the suit to be sought by the parties through a formal application.
Summary
The petitioners filed a special civil application under Article 227 of the Constitution seeking a writ of mandamus directing the Fourth Additional Civil Judge, Surat, to expedite the hearing of an injunction application and the regular civil suit No. 114 of 2023, alleging encroachment by the respondents on school premises. The petitioners argued that no formal application for expediting the suit had been filed, only oral requests, and that the delay was prejudicial. The High Court noted that the suit and injunction application had been pending since 2023 and that expeditious disposal was essential to prevent frustration of the injunction's purpose. Without addressing the merits, the Court directed the trial court to hear and decide the injunction application within three months of receipt of the order, after giving a hearing to the parties. The Court left the matter of expediting the trial of the suit to be addressed by the parties through a formal application to the trial court, and disposed of the petition.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can issue a writ of mandamus under Article 227 to direct a lower civil court to expedite the hearing of an injunction application and a civil suit.
- Whether a status‑quo order is warranted pending the disposal of the suit.
Legislation cited
- Constitution of Indias. Article 227
Subjects
Judgment
C/SCA/11532/2026 ORDER DATED: 18/08/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11532 of 2026
=============================================
UMANATH SITARAM THAKUR & ANR.
Versus
MANOJBHAI VIRENDRAPRAAPSINGH RAJPUT & ORS.
=============================================
Appearance:
MR ABHIRAJ R TRIVEDI(5576) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT
Date : 18/08/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard Mr.Abhiraj Trivedi, learned advocate for the
petitioners.
2. The present petition is 3led under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs:
“A. Your Lordships may be pleased to admit and allow
this petition;
B. Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of
mandamus or certiorari or any other appropriate writ,
order or direction by giving direction to the Ld. Fourth
Additional Civil Judge, Surat to expedite the hearing of
Regular Civil Suit No.114 of 2023 at Annexure-A to
this petition preferably within a period of 3 months or
within stipulated time period or as may be deemed +t
by this Hon'ble Court, in the interest of justice;
C. Pending admission, hearing and +nal disposal of
this petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to direct
the Ld. Fourth Additional Civil Judge, Surat to expedite
the hearing of Regular Civil Suit No.114 of 2023 at
Annexure-A to this petition preferably within a period
of 3 months or within stipulated time period or as may
be deemed +t by this Hon'ble Court, in the interest of
justice;
Page 1 of 3
C/SCA/11532/2026 ORDER DATED: 18/08/2026
D. Pending admission, hearing and +nal disposal of
this petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to pass
an order of status-quo with respect to the plots in
question as mentioned in the Regular Civil Suit No.114
of 2023, pending before the Ld. Fourth Additional Civil
Judge, Surat;”
3. At the outset, Mr.Trivedi, learned advocate would
candidly submit that no formal application was 3led before
the trial court for expediting the hearing of the injunction
application and/or suit but an oral request was always made.
3.1 Mr.Trivedi, learned advocate would submit that due to
encroachment made by the respondent in the site of the
school which is in possession of and run by the petitioners, the
need arises for the early adjudication of the injunction
application and/or the suit may also be decided within the
stipulated time and for such reason, the present petition is
3led.
4. Having heard Mr.Trivedi, learned advocate for the
petitioners and considering the fact that the suit in question
appears to have been 3led in the year 2023 and till date, the
injunction application appears to have been pending before
the trial court as submitted by Mr. Trivedi, learned advocate
for the petitioner. Ordinarily, the Civil Court is required to
hear and decide the injunction application as expeditiously as
possible otherwise the purpose of 3ling the injunction
application would get frustrated.
5. Without further observing on the merits, it is directed to
the trial court to hear and decide the injunction application so
Page 2 of 3
C/SCA/11532/2026 ORDER DATED: 18/08/2026
3led by the petitioner in Regular Civil Suit No. 114 of 2023 as
early as possible, preferably within three months from the
date of receipt of the copy of this order, after giving an
opportunity of hearing to the parties.
6. So far as expediting the trial of the suit is concerned, it
is open for the parties to request the trial court in this regard.
As and when such request is made, the trial Court may
consider such application, in accordance with law.
7. In view of the aforesaid observation and direction, the
present petition is disposed of. Direct service is permitted.
(MAULIK J. SHELAT, J)
GAURAV J THAKER
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: GAURAVKUMAR JANARDANBHAI THAKER(HC00951), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 18/08/2026 16:14:26
Page 3 of 3
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.