Allahabad High Court
GANGA PRASAD UMAR (DEAD) AND 4 OTHERSversusRAJPATI UMAR (DEAD) AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL
Holding
The High Court may issue a direction under Article 227 to expedite a specific pending suit when an inordinate delay exists, directing the trial court to decide the suit within one year without adjournments.
Summary
The petitioners filed a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution seeking a direction to the trial court to expedite Original Suit No. 303 of 1994, which had remained pending for over 32 years. The High Court referred to the decision in Ali Shad Usmani v. Ali Isteba (2015) which generally disallows such directions as they create a class of litigants, but distinguished the present case due to the extraordinary delay. Consequently, the Court directed the trial court to decide the suit within one year of receiving the certified copy of the order, without granting any adjournments, and to proceed on a day‑to‑day basis. The direction was issued solely for case management purposes and the merits of the original suit were not adjudicated. The petition was therefore disposed of after the expeditious‑trial direction was given.
Issues considered
- Whether a High Court can, under Article 227, issue a direction to a lower court to expedite a pending suit despite the general principle against class‑wide directions
- Whether the extraordinary delay of over three decades justifies such a direction
Legislation cited
- Constitution of India — s. Article 227
Subjects
- Article 227
- judicial supervision
- case management
- expeditious trial
- adjournment
- high court direction
- civil litigation delay
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 13334 of 2026
Ganga Prasad Umar (Dead) And 4 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Rajpati Umar (Dead) And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Respondent(s) :
Court No. - 9
HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.
1. This petition under Article 227 of Constitution has been filed seeking a
direction upon court below to expedite the proceedings of Original Suit No.
303 of 1994 (Ganga Prasad Umar Vs. Rajpati Umar).
2. The Division Bench of this Court in case of Ali Shad Usmani vs. Ali
Isteba, 2015 (2) ADJ 250 (DB) had held that no such direction can be
issued as it creates a class amongst the litigants but looking to the facts of
the case that more than 32 years have elapsed and court below till date has
not proceeded to decide the said suit, in view of said fact, no useful purpose
would be served in keeping the matter pending or calling for counter
affidavit or issuing notice to private respondents. The trial court is required
to expedite the proceedings of Original Suit No. 303 of 1994 and decide the
same, expeditiously, preferably, within a period of one year from the date of
production of certified copy of this order, strictly in accordance with law on
day to day basis without granting any adjournment to either of the parties.
3. With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of.
4. It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated the matter on merits.
(Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.)
September 23, 2026
A. V. Singh
Digitally signed by :-
AJAY VIKRAM SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…