Allahabad High Court
SMT BALKUMARIversusSMT NEELAM YADAV AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL
Holding
The High Court held that it may issue a direction to the subordinate court to decide the pending recall application within a stipulated period, without deciding the merits of the original suit.
Summary
The petitioner, Smt. Balkumari, filed a writ petition under Article 227 seeking a direction to the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kanpur Nagar, to decide a pending recall application (Paper No. 88C) filed under Order IX Rule 13 of the CPC in Original Suit No. 489 of 2016. The lower court had earlier dismissed the suit ex parte, and the recall application was pending. The High Court, noting that no further purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending, disposed of the writ petition at the admission stage, directing the lower court to decide the recall application within two months of receiving a certified copy of the order. The Court clarified that it had not adjudicated the merits of the underlying suit. The direction aims at expeditious disposal of the pending application.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can, under Article 227, direct a subordinate court to decide a pending recall application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC expeditiously.
- Whether the High Court should entertain the writ petition at the admission stage without adjudicating the merits of the underlying suit.
Legislation cited
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. Order IX Rule 13, Order IX Rule 7, Section 151
Subjects
- Article 227
- writ petition
- recall application
- expeditious disposal
- Civil Procedure Code
- jurisdiction
- Order IX
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 12975 of 2026
Smt Balkumari
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Smt Neelam Yadav And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ankit Kapoor
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 the court of Additional Civil Judge
(Senior Division), Kanpur Nagar, to decide the recall application paper
no. 88C filed under order 9 Rule 7 read with section 151 C.P.C. filed in
original suit no. 489 of 2016 (Smt. Neelam Yadav Versus Umeshchandra
Yadav and others) pending before him within stipulated period of time as
fixed by this Hon'ble High Court."
2. It is contended that in the suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent, an order
dismissing the suit ex-parte was passed, against which, an application
under Order IX Rule 13 CPC has been moved which is pending
consideration. The sole prayer made in the writ petition is for expeditious
disposal of the said application.
3. As no useful purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending, or
calling for counter affidavit or issuing notice to the private respondents, at
this stage, the writ petition is being disposed of, at the admission stage, with
a direction upon Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kanpur Nagar to
decide the recall application (Paper No.88-C) filed under Order IX Rule 13
CPC in Original Suit No.489 of 2016, in accordance with law, after hearing
all affected, preferably within a period of two months from the date of
production of certified copy of this order.
4. With the aforesaid direction, present writ petition stands disposed of.
A227 No. 12975 of 2026
2
5. It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated the case on merit.
(Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.)
September 18, 2026
SK Goswami
Digitally signed by :-
SHIVAKANT GOSWAMI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…