Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

KAUSHAL KUMAR GAUTAMversusSANJAY AND 12 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The High Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the lower court to decide the pending application within twelve weeks, thereby exercising its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227.

Summary

The petitioner, Kaushal Kumar Gautam, filed a writ petition under Article 227 seeking a direction to the First Additional Civil Judge (Jr.D.) at Kasya, Kushinagar to decide a pending application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC (Misc. case No. 44/2018) arising from original suit No. 748/2003 (Ram Prasad v. Sanjay & others). The petitioner argued that the application had been pending since 2018 despite multiple dates being fixed, and that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the writ petition pending. The High Court examined the petition and found merit in the request for expeditious disposal. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the lower court to decide the pending application within twelve weeks of the certified copy of the order, without unnecessary adjournments, and after giving a hearing to the parties. The order was signed by Justice Manish Kumar Nigam on 19 March 2026.

Issues considered

  • Whether the High Court can, under its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227, direct a lower court to decide a pending application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC expeditiously.
  • Whether the writ petition should be dismissed as it no longer serves any useful purpose.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • Article 227
  • writ petition
  • Civil Procedure Code
  • Order 9 Rule 13
  • expeditious disposal
  • adjournment
  • supervisory jurisdiction

Judgment

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3465 of 2026

Kaushal Kumar Gautam
                                                                .....Petitioner(s)
                                     Versus

Sanjay And 12 Others
                                                              .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)                     :   Rajesh Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s)                     :

Court No. - 5
                  HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed for following relief:

"1. It is. therefore, most respectfully prayed that this to Hon'ble Court may
graciously be pleased to direct the First Additional Civil Judge (Jr.D.),
Kasya, Kushinagar, decide the application Under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C.
bearing misc. case no. 44/2018 arising out of original suit no. 748/2003
dated 31.05.2018 (Ram Prasad Vs. Sanjay & other). expeditiously as
possible within short stipulated period as directed by this Hon'ble Court,
during the pendency of the present petition before this Hon'ble Court.


ii. It is further prayed that this hon'ble court may kindly direct the First
Additional Civil Judge (Jr.D.), Kasya, Kushinagar, to decide the original
suit no. 748/2003, (Ram Prasad Vs. Sanjay & other) expeditiously as
possible within short stipulated period as directed by this Hon'ble Court,
during the pendency of the present petition before this Hon'ble Court."

3. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that an application
under Order IX Rule 13 C.P.C. is pending since 2018 and the same has not
been decided despite several dates have been fixed. He prayed that the same
may be decided, expeditiously.

4. In view of above, no useful purpose would be served in keeping this
petition pending.
                                                                                               A227 No. 3465 of 2026
                                                                     2


                                    5. Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of finally with a
                                    direction to the First Additional Civil Judge (Jr.D.), Kasya, Kushinagar, to
                                    consider and decide the aforementioned Misc. case no. 44/2018, in
                                    accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of twelve
                                    weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order after
                                    ensuring service upon all the opposite parties, giving opportunity of hearing
                                    to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to
                                    either of the parties provided that there is no other legal impediment.




                                                                                      (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
                                    March 19, 2026
                                    Nitika Sri.




Digitally signed by :-
NITIKA SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.