Allahabad High Court
SATYANARAYAN BHATNAGARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 9 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The writ petition is not the appropriate remedy; it is dismissed and the petitioner must file an application under Order 39 Rule‑2A CPC.
Summary
Satyanarayan Bhatnagar filed a writ petition against the State of Uttar Pradesh and nine others, alleging that respondent No.6 was violating an injunction order issued by the trial court in Suit No.1304 of 2025. The petitioner sought relief through the writ jurisdiction of the High Court. The Court examined whether a writ petition is the correct remedy for enforcement of a civil injunction. It held that the appropriate remedy is an application under Order 39 Rule‑2A of the Code of Civil Procedure for execution of the injunction. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, with liberty to approach the trial court under the proper procedure.
Issues considered
- Whether the non‑compliance of a trial‑court injunction can be remedied by a writ petition.
- Whether the appropriate remedy is an application under Order 39 Rule‑2A of the CPC.
Legislation cited
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. Order 39 Rule-2A
Subjects
- injunction
- civil procedure
- Order 39
- remedial jurisdiction
- writ petition
- enforcement of decree
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 18474 of 2026
Satyanarayan Bhatnagar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 9 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Santosh Kumar
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 40
HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J.
HON'BLE GARIMA PRASHAD, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for
the State-respondents.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is despite there being an injunction order
passed by the Trial Court in Suit No.1304 of 2025 against the respondent
no.6, the respondent no.6 is not abiding by the injunction order.
3. If that be so, the appropriate remedy for the petitioner is to file an
application under Order 39 Rule-2A of C.P.C. and the writ petition is not an
appropriate remedy.
4. In such view of the fact, the writ petition is dismissed with the aforesaid
liberty.
May 12, 2026
Sattyarth
(Garima Prashad,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SATTYARTH ANAND
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…