INDRESH CHANDRAversusDHARMRAJ (DECEASED) AND 7 OTHERS

                HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
              MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 12624 of 2026

Indresh Chandra
                                                                         .....Petitioner(s)
                                          Versus
Dharmraj (Deceased) And 7 Others
                                                                       .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)             :   Awadhesh Kumar Sharma, Ranvijay Kumar
Counsel for Respondent(s)             :

Court No. - 9
                   HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.

1. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:-

      "i. Issue an order or direction to Additional Civil Judge (S.D) Court
      no.17, Allahabad to decide the 0.5. no. 379 of 2015, (Indresh Chandra Vs.
      Dharmraj) within stipulated period."

2. Recently, the Constitution Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in High Court Bar
Association, Allahabad vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others (2024) 6 SCC 267
has held that Constitution Courts should refrain from fixing a time-bound schedule for
the disposal of cases pending before any other courts. The Court further held that issue
of prioritising the disposal of cases should be best left to the decision of the courts
concerned where the cases are pending. Relevant para 47.3 of the said judgment is
extracted hereasunder :-

      "Constitutional courts, in the ordinary course, should refrain from fixing
      a time-bound schedule for the disposal of cases pending before any other
      courts. Constitutional courts may issue directions for the time-bound
      disposal of cases only in exceptional circumstances. The issue of
      prioritising the disposal of cases should be best left to the decision of the
      courts concerned where the cases are pending;"

3. The Division Bench of this Court in Ali Shad Usmani vs. Ali Isteba, 2015 (2)
ADJ 250 (DB) has held that no direction can be issued to the sub-ordinate courts for
deciding the suit within stipulated period. Relevant portion of the judgment is
extracted hereasunder:-

      "We are not inclined to issue a direction for the expeditious hearing of a
      Civil Suit which is pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division),
      District-Azamgarh. It would be most inappropriate to Court to entertain a
      writ petition under Article 226 and/or under Article 227 of the
      Constitution simply for the purpose of expediting the hearing of a suit.
                                                                                                      A227 No. 12624 of 2026
                                                                         2

                                          Such orders, if granted, place a class of litigants, who move the court in a
                                          separate and preferential category whereas other cases which may be of
                                          similar or greater antiquity and urgency are left to be decided in the
                                          normal channel. Hence, any such direction may be issued with the
                                          greatest care and circumspection by the High Court otherwise the Civil
                                          Courts will be overburdened only with requests for expeditious disposal
                                          of suits, which have been expedited by the High Court. Most of the
                                          litigants cannot afford the expense of moving the High court and would
                                          not, therefore, be in a position to have the benefit of such an order.

                                          Ultimately, it must be left to the judicious exercise of discretion of the
                                          concerned Court to determine whether a ground for urgency has been
                                          made out. We emphasize that there may be other cases such as involving
                                          senior citizens, those who are differently abled or people suffering from a
                                          particular disablilty socio-economic or otherwise which may prime cause
                                          of urgent disposal. It is for the learned Trial Judge in each case to apply
                                          his or her mind and decide whether the hearing of the suit to be
                                          expedited.

                                          For these reasons, we are not inclined to entertain the petition. The
                                          petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to cost."

                                    4. In view of above, this Court declines to direct the court below to expedite the
                                    proceedings pending before it.

                                    5. The petitioner may, however, move an application for expeditious disposal of Suit
                                    No. 379 of 2015, (Indresh Chandra Vs. Dharmraj) before the court concerned who
                                    will decide the same on the basis of pendency of cases before it and also keeping in
                                    mind the dictum of Hon’ble Apex Court.

                                    6. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

                                    7. Registrar (Compliance) to communicate this order to court concerned, within 48
                                    hours.
                                    September 14, 2026
                                    (V. S. SINGH)
                                                                                                (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
VIDYA SAGAR SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad