SUSHILA SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. REVENUE LKO. AND 4 OTHERS
A227/6338/2025 · 2025-11-13
S Q H Rizvi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 185819 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 185819 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6338 of 2025 Court No. - 20 HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J.
1. Heard Sri Arun Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The present writ petition has been filed, inter alia, for the following relief:
"(i) To direct the opposite parties to decide the Regular Suit No.527/2015 in the title of Ramnath Maurya and others versus Raj Kumar and another, pending before the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division, South, Room No.24, District- Sultanpur within stipulated time fixed by this Hon'ble Court contained as annexure no.2 along with this petition. (ii) ..................... (iii) ...................."
3. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is bonafide purchaser of the suit property through a registered sale deed while the opposite party nos.3 & 4 claim their title in the said property on the basis of a notarized deed. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the opposite party no.2 who transferred the said property to the opposite party nos.3 & 4 filed a suit for cancellation of the sale-deed executed in favour of the petitioner. The said suit is pending since 2015. It is also contended on behalf of the petitioner that in the aforesaid suit, issues have already been framed but due to non co- Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Arun Kumar Shukla, Brijendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Sushila Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Lko. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s)
operation on the part of the contesting parties, the same could not be finally decided. 4. In view of the nature of the order proposed to be passed, the service of notice upon the respondent nos. 2 to 5 is dispensed with. 5. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served in keeping this writ petition pending. 6.
Accordingly, without adverting on merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to finally dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, South, Room No.24, District- Sultanpur, before whom the aforementioned matter is pending for disposal, to decide the Regular Suit No. 527/2015 (Ramnath Maurya and others versus Raj Kumar and another), strictly in accordance with law after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, expeditiously and preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, unless there is any legal impediment. It is further directed that no unnecessary adjournments be granted to either of the parties and the adjournment, if prayed for, the same shall be granted only in exceptional circumstances. 7. With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition is disposed of. November 13, 2025 Abhishek Gupta A227 No. 6338 of 2025 2 (Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench