Allahabad High Court
A227/1039/2012 of LAL DHARI Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU ITS LAW SECY. AND OTHERS on 7 October 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1039 of 2012 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:- " a ) issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the learned trial Court to decide
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1039 of 2012
Court No. - 9
HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:- "a) issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the learned trial Court to decide the application under Order 39 Rule 4 CPC moved by petitioner against the ex-parte interim order dated 28.5.2009 in suit No.730 of 2009."
2. Petitioner before this Court is defendant in the suit. An ad-interim injunction was granted in favour of plaintiff-respondent, against which, he had filed objections under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC, which according to petitioner, was pending when the writ petition was filed. The sole prayer made in the writ petition is for expeditious disposal of application under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC.
3. This petition is of the year 2012 and almost 14 years' have elapsed, by now, temporary injunction application filed by the plaintiff-respondent along with objections must have been decided.
4. In case, the temporary injunction application has not been decided till date, trial Court shall make every effort to decide the said application along with objections filed by petitioner within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, strictly in accordance with law, after hearing all the affected parties.
5. With aforesaid observations, writ petition stands disposed of. October 8, 2026 SK Goswami Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Akhilesh Kumar, Chandrasen Pal Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.) Lal Dhari .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru Its Law Secy. And Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- SHIVAKANT GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad