Allahabad High Court
MAHESHversusSONWATI AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL
Holding
The High Court held that it cannot issue a direction for the expeditious disposal of the suit and dismissed the petition.
Summary
The petitioner Mahesh filed a writ petition under Article 227 seeking a court order directing the Civil Judge (Senior Division) of Gautam Buddh Nagar to decide his original suit (No.1553 of 2025) expeditiously, alleging irreparable loss if delayed. The High Court examined the Supreme Court’s decision in High Court Bar Association v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2024) which cautions constitutional courts against imposing time‑bound schedules on lower courts except in exceptional cases. It also relied on the Division Bench judgment in Ali Shad Usmani v. Ali Isteba (2015), which declined to issue such directions, emphasizing the need to avoid preferential treatment and overburdening subordinate courts. Applying these precedents, the Court concluded that it could not compel the lower court to set a fixed timeline for disposal. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, with the Court advising the petitioner to approach the lower court directly for any expeditious disposal application.
Issues considered
- Can a High Court, under Article 227, direct a subordinate civil court to decide a suit within a time‑bound schedule?
- Does the Supreme Court’s precedent restricting time‑bound directions to lower courts preclude the relief sought by the petitioner?
- Is the claim of irreparable loss sufficient to justify a mandatory expeditious disposal order?
Subjects
- Article 227
- writ petition
- expeditious disposal
- time‑bound schedule
- civil suit
- jurisdiction
- urgency
- high court direction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 13281 of 2026
Mahesh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Sonwati And Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Uma Nath Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s) :
Court No. - 9
HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.
1. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:-
"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be
pleased to allow this petition and may direct the Civil Judge (Senior Division),
Gautam Buddh Nagar to decide the Original Suit No.1553 of 2025 (Mahesh
Versus Sonwati and another) expeditiously without granting unnecessary
adjournment within time bound period which may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court,
failing which petitioner will suffer irreparable loss and injury and/or pass such other
and further order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case."
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 Constitutional 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
A227 No. 13281 of 2026
2
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. 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 for expediting
the proceedings pending before it.
5. The petitioner may, however, move an application for expeditious disposal
of the Original Suit No.1553 of 2025 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 as noted above.
6. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.
7. Registrar (Compliance) to communicate this order to the Court concerned
within 48 hours.
September 23, 2026
SK Goswami
(Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SHIVAKANT GOSWAMI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…