Allahabad High Court
MAHAGUN MODERNE APARTMENT OWNERS ASSOCIATION AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The order keeping the demand notice in abeyance is set aside as it cannot be sustained without a prayer for interim relief.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court entertained a special appeal against an order dated 17‑04‑2026 in which a Single Judge had kept a demand notice dated 01‑01‑2026 in abeyance. The appellants argued that the writ petition did not seek any relief for quashing the notice nor any stay, and therefore the judge had no jurisdiction to grant interim relief. The respondents contended that the interim order was an incidental power of the court, relying on conduct in a related writ (Writ‑C No. 5658 of 2024). The Court held that without a specific prayer for interim relief, granting such an order would surprise the opposite party and breach natural justice. Consequently, the order keeping the demand notice in abeyance was set aside and the appeal was allowed. The main petition was ordered to be listed for hearing on 13‑05‑2026.
Issues considered
- Can a court keep a demand notice in abeyance when the writ petition contains no prayer for interim relief or stay?
- Does granting an interim order without a specific prayer violate the principles of natural justice?
Subjects
- interim relief
- natural justice
- writ petition
- abeyance
- special appeal
- demand notice
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 500 of 2026
Mahagun Moderne Apartment Owners Association
and another .....Appellant(s)
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh and 3 others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s) : Ambuj Mishra, Rajesh Kumar Shukla,
Himanshu Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Bobby Mishra, Ankit Gaur, S.C.,
Rishabh Kesarwani, Shiva Pandey,
Shrish Chandra
Chief Justice's Court
HON'BLE ARUN BHANSALI, CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA, J.
1. This appeal is directed against order dated 17.04.2026 passed by
learned Single Judge in Writ C No. 12565 of 2026 wherein, after noticing
the contentions of the parties and ordering for listing of the case on
05.05.2026, the impugned demand notice dated 01.01.2026, which was
subject matter of the writ petition, has been kept in abeyance.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants made submissions that the learned
Single Judge was not justified in keeping the demand notice dated
01.01.2026 in abeyance, inasmuch as in the writ petition, no relief for
quashing of the said demand notice was prayed. Further, submissions
were made that even no stay application was filed in the writ petition and,
therefore, there was no occasion for the petitioner to have contested the
aspect for grant of interim relief and, therefore, the grant of relief in the
matter, is not justified.
3. Counsel for the respondents made submissions that the grant of interim
order is an incidental power of the Court and the order has been passed
looking to the conduct of the appellants in Writ-C No. 5658 of 2024,
wherein for about two years, the matter is not being argued and, therefore,
the order impugned does not call for any interference.
4. We have considered the submissions made and have perused the
SPLA No. 500 of 2026
2
material available on record.
5. It is not in dispute that along with the writ petition no application
seeking interim relief was filed by the respondents. Once, no prayer is
made in the writ petition/stay application is not filed seeking interim
relief, the consideration of matter for grant of interim relief essentially
takes the other side by surprise and grant of order would be in violation of
the principles of natural justice.
6. In that view of the matter, we find that the order impugned dated
17.04.2026 passed by learned Single Judge keeping the demand notice
dated 01.01.2026 in abeyance, cannot be sustained.
7. Consequently, the appeal is allowed. The order dated 17.04.2026
passed by learned Single Judge, to the extent of keeping the demand
notice dated 01.01.2026 in abeyance, is set aside.
8. The main petition, as has been indicated, is ordered to be listed on
13.05.2026 in top ten cases before the learned Single Judge.
9. It is expected that the appellants herein shall not prolong the matter any
further and the matter shall be argued appropriately.
(Kshitij Shailendra,J.) (Arun Bhansali,CJ.)
May 7, 2026
Sandeep/AKShukla
Digitally signed by :-
SANDEEP KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…