Allahabad High Court
SMT. KALAWATIversusH.K.S. DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. AND 11 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL
Holding
The writ petition is disposed of without adjudicating merits, with directions to the trial court to decide the pending injunction and Order VII Rule 11 applications within specified time‑frames.
Summary
Smt. Kalawati filed a writ petition under Article 227 seeking speedy disposal of her objection to an ad interim injunction granted in an original suit and her application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC for rejection of that suit. The High Court, noting that keeping the matter pending served no useful purpose, disposed of the writ petition at the admission stage without calling for a counter‑affidavit or issuing notice to the private respondents. The Court directed the trial court to decide the temporary injunction application within one month of receiving a certified copy of the order and to decide the Order VII Rule 11 application within the next two months. The directions were to be given after hearing all affected parties. The Court expressly stated that it had not adjudicated the merits of the underlying dispute. The writ petition was therefore disposed of.
Issues considered
- What procedural steps are appropriate for disposing a writ petition seeking expeditious disposal of an objection to an ad interim injunction and an Order VII Rule 11 application?
- Whether the High Court can direct the trial court to decide the pending applications without hearing the parties in the writ petition.
Legislation cited
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. Order VII Rule 11
- Constitution of India — s. Article 227
Subjects
- Article 227
- Civil Procedure Code
- Order VII Rule 11
- temporary injunction
- ad interim injunction
- writ petition
- expeditious disposal
- jurisdiction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 13746 of 2026
Smt. Kalawati
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
H.K.S. Developers Pvt. Ltd. And 11 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Kartikay Agarwal, Poorva Agarwal, Punit Kumar Gupta
Counsel for Respondent(s) :
Court No. - 9
HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.
1. This is defendant's petition.
2. In the suit filed by plaintiffs-respondents, an application for grant of
temporary injunction was moved in which an ad interim injunction has been
granted against which the defendant-petitioner has filed her objection, which
is pending consideration. The defendant has also filed an application under
Order VII Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the suit, which is also pending
consideration. The sole prayer made in the writ petition is for expeditious
disposal of the objection along with application filed under Order VII Rule
11 CPC.
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 proceed with application for grant of temporary
injunction filed in Original Suit No. 83 of 2019 and decide the same, in
accordance with law, considering the objection/stay vacation filed by
petitioner, after hearing all affected parties, preferably within a period of one
month from the date of production of certified copy of this order and,
thereafter, proceed with application filed under Order VII Rule 11 CPC and
decide the same, within next two months.
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…