Allahabad High Court
RAMPHER AND ANOTHERversusRAMKHELAWAN
- Decided
- Bench
- VIKAS BUDHWAR
Holding
The High Court declined to grant interim relief, directing the petitioners to seek such protection before the revisional court on the next hearing date.
Summary
The petitioners sought interim protection against a sale deed prepared by the executing court after a decree in Civil Suit No. 41 of 1987. Their objection under Section 47 of the CPC to the execution was rejected, leading them to file a revision, which was entertained but only notices were issued with a further date fixed. The petitioners argued that an interim order should have been granted once the revision was pending. The High Court held that the petitioners must seek interim relief before the revisional court on the next scheduled date, and declined to interfere at this stage. Consequently, the petition was disposed without granting any interim protection.
Issues considered
- Whether an interim order should be granted by the High Court when a revision under Article 227 is pending and the revisional court has only issued notices.
Legislation cited
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 47
Subjects
- Article 227
- revision
- interim relief
- CPC Section 47
- execution of decree
- supervisory jurisdiction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5479 of 2026
Rampher And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Ramkhelawan
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Subedar Mishra
Counsel for Respondent(s) :
Court No. - 5
HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J.
Order on Civil Misc. Amendment Application No. 2 of 2026
1. Since there is no objection to the same by the learned Standing Counsel,
amendment application stands allowed.
2. Let necessary amendment be carried out in the writ petition by learned
counsel for petitioner during the course of the day.
Order on petition
1. Heard Shri Subedar Mishra, learned counsel for the revisionist-petitioner.
2. In view of the order, which is being proposed to be passed today, notices
are not being issued to the plaintiff-respondents.
3. The case of the petitioners is that a decree came to be passed in Civil Suit
No. 41 of 1987. Thereafter an execution came to be preferred by the decree
holder to which the petitioners filed its objection under Section 47 of the
CPC which came to be rejected by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court
No. 19, Jaunpur on 18.12.2025 against which the petitioner preferred a
revision which is pending and there is no interim order, however, during the
pendency of the aforesaid revision, the executing court prepared the sale
deed draft, the petitioner filed its objection on 30.03.2026, however, the
objection so preferred by the petitioners came to be rejected on 30.03.2026
aggrieved whereof the petitioners herein preferred Civil Revision No. 50 of
2026 before the District Judge, Jaunpur in which on 02.04.2026, the revision
was entertained but only notices were issued, fixing date on 30.04.2026.
A227 No. 5479 of 2026
2
4. Questioning the order dated 02.04.2026 differing the interim protection,
the petitioner has been filed the present petition.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has sought to argue that once a revision
stood preferred then interim order ought to have been accorded and in not
according interim order and while issuing notice, the trial court has
committed a serious error.
6. In the opinion of the Court, once the revision itself is pending and it is
apparent that objections have been required from the respondents therein by
virtue of the order dated 02.04.2026 and the next date fixed on notice is
30.04.2026, thus, it is for the petitioners to insist the Court for grant of
interim protection therein.
7. Accordingly, the interference at the stage is declined, the petition stands
disposed of.
8. Leaving it open to the petitioner to press for the interim relief before the
revisional court on the next date fixed and the next date fixed, the revisional
court shall consider the interim relief for the petitioner and pass appropriate
orders and in case not on the said date then any other date be fixed without
granting unnecessary adjournments.
May 7, 2026
Ashu
(Vikas Budhwar,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…