Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 42921 (ALL)

DHARAM KUMAR AND ANOTHER v. SRI THAKUR RAMJANKI JI BIRAJMAN MANDIR GUPTARGADHI AND 5 OTHERS

A227/3741/2025 · 2025-04-16

Rohit Ranjan Agarwal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:56652 Court No. - 9 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3741 of 2025 Petitioner :- Dharam Kumar And Another Respondent :- Sri Thakur Ramjanki Ji Birajman Mandir Guptargadhi And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Harish Kumar Shukla,Rajesh Kumar Chitragupt Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J. 1. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayers; "(a) Set aside the impugned order dated 07.03.2025 passed by Judicial Officer, Gram Nyalay, Tehsil Harraiya, District Basti in Civil Suit No. 86 of 2014 (Thakur Ramjanki Vs. Baburam and others) (Annexure No. 01 to this petition). (b) To direct the District Judge, Basti to decide 6C application filed by the defendants/petitioners in Revision No. 9 of 2025 (Amarnath Das Vs. Ghanshyam Das and others) at an early date in accordance with law and till disposal of 6C application, the parties of revision may kindly be directed to maintain status quo with regard to property in dispute." 2. It is contended that in the suit instituted by plaintiff respondents application for grant of temporary injunction was initially rejected, against which a misc. appeal was filed which was allowed. The said order passed by appellate court was challenged before this Court wherein a coordinate Bench had directed the parties to maintain status quo. It appears that during pendency of writ petition (Matters Under Article 227 No. 6110 of 2021) the defendants were interfering in possession of plaintiffs. An application under Section 151 CPC was moved by plaintiffs for compliance of the interim order granted by the Court. The trial court had directed for police assistance to the plaintiffs, against which Revision No. 9 of 2025 was filed by defendant petitioners alongwith application 6C in the said case. According to petitioners' counsel only notices have been issued in the revision and application 6C has not been decided till date. 3. As no useful purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending, the writ petition is being disposed of, at the admission stage, without calling for counter affidavit or issuing notice to private respondent, with a direction upon the District Judge, Basti to decide the temporary injunction application (6-C) filed in Revision No. 9 of 2025, in accordance with law, after hearing all affected parties, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. 4. 4. With the aforesaid directions, writ petition stands disposed of. 5. It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated the matter on merits. Order Date :- 17.4.2025 Shekhar Digitally signed by :- SHASHI SHEKHAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad