Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 187901 (ALL)

RAN VIJAY SINGH AND OTHERS v. COURT OF ADDL. COMMISSIONER JUDICIAL, AYODHYA DIVISION, AYODHYA AND OTHERS

A227/6730/2025 · 2025-11-18

Alok Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6730 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel on behalf of respondent no.1 and Shri Mohan Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.2. 2. In view of the proposed order, notice to respondents no. 3 to 13, is dispensed with. 3. Present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners with the prayer to direct the respondent no.1 i.e. Court of Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Ayodhya, Division- Ayodhya to decide the proceedings of Case No. 1057/2025, Ambika Prasad Singh and others Vs. Rajendra Singh and others, in Appeal under Section 207 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 pending before the opposite party no.1 - Court of Additional Commissioner, (Judicial), Ayodhya, Division Ayodhya, expeditiously in a time bound manner, in the interest of justice. 4. It has been submitted that suit got registered bearing case no. 5833 of 2023, Sub Divisional officer (Judicial), District Amethi in amongst Rajendra Singh Vs. Karanjeet Singh and others and the preliminary decree was passed. After adopting due process, final decree was passed and the aforesaid suit got decreed. Being aggrieved from the final decree, the petitioners filed an appeal under Section 207 of the U.P. Revenue Code,2006. It has been stated that the matter is urgent and a perusal of the order sheet clearly indicates that though the case is regularly listed but it is routinely adjourned on one pretext or the other. 4. It is noticed that the instant matter relates to 2025 and the trial courts are heavily burdened with the dockets due to which large number of cases are pending before them. In the present case, no extraordinary circumstance has been indicated by the petitioner so as to interfere and Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Somdutta Singh, Shivam Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Ran Vijay Singh And Others .....Petitioner(s) Court Of Addl. Commissioner Judicial, Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya And Others .....Respondent(s) pass orders for expeditious disposal of the revision which has been filed only in 2024. Accordingly, no case for interference is made out at this stage. 5. However, looking to the aforesaid circumstances, liberty is granted to the petitioner to move appropriate application before the trial court within next two weeks for expediting the proceedings. In case, such an application is made, the trail court shall consider and decide the same within two weeks thereafter by a reasoned and speaking order. In case, the trial court finds that a case for urgency has been made out, it shall proceed to consider and decide the case of the petitioner expeditiously. 6. With aforesaid direction the petition stands disposed of. November 18, 2025 Muk A227 No. 6730 of 2025 2 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench