Allahabad High Court
BRIJESH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the lower court to decide the pending suit within twelve weeks.
Summary
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the lower court (Tahsil Mounath Bhanj, District Mau) to decide a pending civil suit (Case No. 232 of 2026) that had been adjourned repeatedly. The petitioner argued that the suit was unduly delayed and requested the High Court to order its expeditious disposal. The Court observed that the writ petition served no useful purpose if the underlying suit remained pending. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition and directed Respondent No. 2, the lower court, to decide the pending suit within twelve weeks of the certified copy of the order, without unnecessary adjournments, after serving all parties. The order aims to ensure timely justice in the pending civil matter.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition can be entertained to compel a lower court to decide a pending civil suit expeditiously
- Whether the High Court may direct a specific time‑frame for disposal of the pending suit
Subjects
- Writ Petition
- Expeditious Disposal
- Civil Procedure
- Adjournments
- Judicial Efficiency
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 17537 of 2026
Brijesh Yadav
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Chandrakant Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 36
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- यह िक माननीय न्यायालय से सिवन्ा िनवेदन है िक परमादेश ्ऺकृित के यािचकादेश, आदेश / िनदरॏश के
माध्यम से न्यायालय अपर उप िजलािधकारी,तहसील मऊनाथ भंजन, जनपद मऊ के सम्ष लिम्बत वाद
संख्या 232 वषर् 2026 (कंप्यूटरीकृत याद संख्या डी202615510000232) आलोंक कुमार िसह बनाम
नवीन कुमार िसह, का िनस्तारण त्विरतगित से शी्साितशी्स (िनयत/िनधार्िरत अविध के भीतर) करने हेतु
उ्तरवादी संख्या 2 को आदेिशत/िनदरॏिशत करने की महती कृपा करें।"
3. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that aforementioned case is
pending consideration 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
respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the aforementioned case, 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.
May 5, 2026
Nitika Sri.
(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
NITIKA SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…