Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 202943 (ALL)

RAM SUMER v. SRI VACHASPATI SINGH, SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE PRATAPGARH

CAPL/2117/2025 · 2025-11-12

Manish Kumar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2117 of 2025 Court No. - 8 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J. 1. Heard. 2. The present contempt application has been preferred against the alleged non-compliance of judgement and order dated 23.05.2025 in Writ C No.4878 of 2025, which is quoted hereinbelow: "Heard. Learned Counsel for the State authorities says that he has instructions from the Sub-Divisional Magistrate concerned that on the application of the petitioner for fresh exercise for patthar nasab would be undertaken at the earliest. In view of the above statement, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the S.D.M. concerned to conduct the said exercise at the earliest say within a period of three weeks. " 3. Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the compliance affidavit has been filed by respondent mentioning therein the details of civil suit filed by the applicant wherein an injunction order has been passed, the appeal preferred against the order passed under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, which is pending and due to the said reason the direction issued by the writ court could not be implemented to hand over the physical possession, though the demarcation has been made. All these facts were not disclosed at the time of filing of the writ petition. 4. Against the said compliance affidavit an objection has been filed by the applicant admitting the averments regarding the suit, injunction order and Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Govind Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ram Sumer .....Applicant(s) Sri Vachaspati Singh, Sub Divisional Magistrate Pratapgarh .....Opposite Party(s) appeal while giving reply to Paras 8 and 9 of the compliance affidavit. 5. In view of discussion made hereinabove, there is no willful disobedience of the order passed in the writ petition, hence, the contempt application is devoid of merits and it is dismissed accordingly. 6. The notice, if any, issued against the respondent stands discharged. November 12, 2025 S. Kumar CAPL No. 2117 of 2025 2 (Manish Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- SANTOSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- SANTOSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench