Allahabad High Court
VISHWANATHversusRAMOO AND 5 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
The High Court directed the Civil Judge to decide the pending interim injunction application within twelve weeks, thereby disposing of the writ petition.
Summary
The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 227 seeking a direction to the Civil Judge (Junior Division) of Baberu, District Banda, to decide a pending interim injunction application filed on 13 November 2024 in Original Suit No. 163/2024. The petitioner argued that despite several dates being fixed, the application under Order 39 Rule 1 of the CPC remained undecided, causing undue delay. The Court examined the petition and found that the writ petition had no further purpose once the direction could be given. Consequently, the Court disposed of the petition and directed the lower court to decide the injunction application within twelve weeks of receiving a certified copy of the order, ensuring service and hearing, and to avoid unnecessary adjournments. The order aims to expedite the pending application without further legal impediments.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court, exercising its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227, can issue a mandatory time-bound direction to a subordinate civil court to decide a pending interim injunction application under Order 39 of the CPC.
Legislation cited
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. Order 39 Rule 1, Order 39 Rule 2
Subjects
- interim injunction
- Article 227
- supervisory jurisdiction
- Civil Procedure Code
- court directions
- adjournments
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3478 of 2026
Vishwanath
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Ramoo And 5 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Chandra Shekhar Garg
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:
" (i) issue a suitable order or direction upon the learned Civil Judge (Junior
Division), Baberu, District Banda to decide the plaintiff-petitioner's pending interim
injunction Application dated 13.11.2024 (Paper no.6C-2) under Order-39 Rules-1 & 2
C.P.C. filed in Original Suit no.163/2024 (Vishwanath Vs. Ramoo & Ors.), within a
stipulated time-frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court."
3. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that an application for
interim injunction under Order XXXIX Rule 1 of C.P.C. (6C-2 Application) is
pending since 2024 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.
5. Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to the
Civil Judge (Junior Division), Baberu, District Banda to consider and decide the
aforementioned interim injunction application (6C-2 Application), 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.
March 19, 2026
Nitika Sri.
(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
NITIKA SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…