Allahabad High Court

INDRAPALversusNEERAJ GOYAL AND 6 OTHERS

Decided: 17 May 2026
Bench: VIKAS BUDHWAR

Holding

The application is dismissed as infructuous because the matter has already been decided under Order 9 Rule 9 CPC.

Summary

Indrapal filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court against Neeraj Goyal and six others. The petitioner sought relief, but the learned counsel argued that the petition had become infructuous because the matter was already decided under Order 9 Rule 9 of the CPC. The respondents' counsel did not oppose this submission. The court accepted the contention that the earlier CPC order rendered the writ petition moot. Consequently, the court dismissed the application as infructuous, granting the petitioner liberty to pursue any other appropriate legal remedies. The judgment was delivered by Justice Vikas Budhwar on May 18, 2026.

Issues considered

Whether the writ petition is infructuous after the decision of the application under Order 9 Rule 9 CPC

Legislation cited

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. Order 9 Rule 9

Subjects

writ petition
Civil Procedure Code
Order 9 Rule 9
infructuous
high court

Judgment

                                               HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                                                    MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4280 of 2026

                                    Indrapal
                                                                                             .....Petitioner(s)
                                                                       Versus

                                    Neeraj Goyal And 6 Others
                                                                                           .....Respondent(s)

                                    Counsel for Petitioner(s)       : Birendra Kumar, Himanshu Dubey, Sr.
                                                                      Advocate
                                    Counsel for Respondent(s)       : Ghazanfar Abbas, Mohan Lal Pandey,
                                                                      Rama Goel Bansal, Shalini Goel

                                    Court No. - 5
                                                          HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J.

                                    1. Sri Himanshu Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner has made a
                                    statement at bar that the writ petitioner has rendered infructuous
                                    particularly when the application under Order 9 Rule 9 CPC has been
                                    decided, thus, now liberty be accorded to take appropriate legal
                                    proceedings as permissible under law.

                                    2. Sri Rama Goel Bansal who appears for the respondents has no
                                    objection to the same.

                                    3. Accordingly, the present application is dismissed as infructuous with
                                    the aforesaid liberty.



                                                                                        (Vikas Budhwar,J.)
                                    May 18, 2026
                                    Rajesh




Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…