Allahabad High Court
SMT. SAROJ SRIVASTAVA AND 2 OTHERSversusSMT. VANDANA SRIVASTAVA AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL
Holding
The High Court directed the subordinate court to decide the impleadment application within two months, disposing of the writ petition without reaching the merits.
Summary
The petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 227 seeking a direction to the Civil Judge (S.D.) F.T.C., Prayagraj to decide an impleadment application dated 22‑11‑2014 and an application under Section 340 of the Criminal Procedure Code dated 02‑07‑2015, pending in Suit No. 1173 of 2013, on a day‑to‑day basis and within a stipulated period. The petition was filed on behalf of a third party and only sought expeditious disposal of the pending applications. The High Court observed that keeping the matter pending served no useful purpose and, without calling for a counter‑affidavit or issuing notice to private respondents, directed the lower court to decide the impleadment application within two months of the order. The Court clarified that it had not adjudicated the merits of the suit or the applications. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of at the admission stage.
Issues considered
- What authority does a High Court have under Article 227 to direct a subordinate court to expedite the hearing of an impleadment application and a Section 340 CrPC application?
Legislation cited
- Code of Civil Procedure — s. Order I Rule 10
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. Section 340
Subjects
- Article 227
- writ petition
- impleadment
- expeditious disposal
- Civil Procedure Code
- Criminal Procedure Code
- subordinate court direction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 13660 of 2026
Smt. Saroj Srivastava And 2 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Smt. Vandana Srivastava And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Laxami Pati, Pavan 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 direct the learned court of Civil Judge (S.D.) F.T.C.,
Court No.13, Prayagraj to decide the Impleadmant application dated
22.11.2014 and application under section 340 of the Cr.P.C. dated
02.07.2015 filed in Suit No. 1173 of 2013 (Vandana Srivastava Versus
Pramod Kumar Srivastava) pending before him as expeditiously as
possible by way of day to day hearing within stipulated period."
2. This is a petition on behalf of third party. An impleadment application
under Order I Rule 10 CPC has been filed in suit filed by plaintiff-
respondent, which is pending consideration. The sole prayer is for
expeditious disposal of the same.
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 court concerned to decide the impleadment application dated
22.11.2014 filed in Suit No. 1173 of 2013, in accordance with law, after
hearing all affected parties, preferably within a period of two months from
the date of production of certified copy of this order.
4. With the aforesaid directions, writ petition stands disposed of.
5. It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated the matter on merits.
September 30, 2026
(V. S. SINGH)
(Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VIDYA SAGAR SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…