Allahabad High Court
A227/3478/2026 of VISHWANATH Vs RAMOO AND 5 OTHERS on 18 March 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3478 of 2026 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed for following relief: " (i) issue a suitable order or direction
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3478 of 2026
Court No. - 5
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, 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. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.
2. The instant writ petition has been filed for following relief: " (i) issue a suitable order or direction upon the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Baberu, District Banda to decide the plaintiff-petitioner's pending interim injunction Application dated 13.11.2024 (Paper no.6C-2) under Order-39 Rules-1 & 2 C.P.C. filed in Original Suit no.163/2024 (Vishwanath Vs. Ramoo & Ors.), within a stipulated time-frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court."
3. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that an application for interim injunction under Order XXXIX Rule 1 of C.P.C. (6C-2 Application) is pending since 2024 and the same has not been decided despite several dates have been fixed. He prayed that the same may be decided, expeditiously.
4. In view of above, no useful purpose would be served in keeping this petition pending.
5. Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Baberu, District Banda to consider and decide the aforementioned interim injunction application (6C-2 Application), in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of twelve weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order after ensuring service upon all the opposite parties, giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties provided that there is no other legal impediment.
March 19, 2026 Nitika Sri. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Chandra Shekhar Garg Counsel for Respondent(s) : (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Vishwanath .....Petitioner(s) Ramoo And 5 Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- NITIKA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad