Allahabad High Court
RAM CHANDRAversusRAM KHELAWAN AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL
Holding
The High Court directed the Civil Judge to decide the pending temporary injunction application within one month and disposed of the writ petition without reaching the merits.
Summary
The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 227 seeking a direction to the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 12, Prayagraj, to decide a pending temporary injunction application (6‑C) in Suit No. 334 of 2018. The petitioner argued that the injunction application had remained undecided for an unreasonable period. The High Court observed that keeping the matter pending served no useful purpose and, at the admission stage, directed the lower court to decide the injunction application within one month of receiving a certified copy of the order, after hearing all affected parties. No counter‑affidavit or notice to private respondents was issued, and the High Court expressly stated that it did not adjudicate the merits of the dispute. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can, under Article 227, direct a subordinate court to decide a pending temporary injunction application within a specified time‑frame.
- Whether a writ petition may be disposed of at the admission stage without issuing notice to private respondents.
Subjects
- Article 227
- temporary injunction
- civil procedure
- writ petition
- direction to lower court
- admission stage disposal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 13237 of 2026
Ram Chandra
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Ram Khelawan And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Madhusudan
Counsel for Respondent(s) :
Court No. - 9
HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.
1. This writ petition has been filed seeking direction upon the Civil Judge
(Senior Division), Court No. 12, Prayagraj to decide the temporary
injunction application (6-C) filed in Suit No. 334 of 2018 within a time
frame fixed by this Court.
2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that 6-C
application filed in Original Suit No. 334 of 2018 is pending
consideration and till date same has not been decided by the court
concerned.
3. As no useful purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending,
the writ petition is being disposed of, at the admission stage, without
calling for counter affidavit or issuing notice to private respondents, with
a direction upon Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 12, Prayagraj
to decide the temporary injunction application (6-C) filed in Suit No. 334
of 2018, in accordance with law, after hearing all affected parties,
preferably within a period of one month from the date of production of
certified copy of this order.
4. With the aforesaid directions, writ petition stands disposed of. It is
made clear that this Court has not adjudicated the matter on merits.
(Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.)
September 23, 2026
Shekhar
Digitally signed by :-
SHASHI SHEKHAR PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…