Allahabad High Court

A227/3400/2026 of SMT RAMWATI Vs HIMANSHU AND 3 OTHERS on 17 March 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3400 of 2026 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Tanmay Agrawal, learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 and perused the record. 2. This writ petition has been filed challenging

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3400 of 2026

Court No. - 5

HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Tanmay Agrawal, learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 and perused the record.

2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 19.2.2026 passed by the District Judge, Etah. Appeal was filed by the defendant-respondent against an order of injunction passed by the Trial Court on 13.1.2026. In the appeal, an application was moved for adjournment by the petitioner on the ground that talks of compromise are going on and, therefore, the case may be adjourned. On the said application 19.2.2026 and operation of order dated 3.1.2026 passed by the Trial Court has been stayed.

3. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the Court below have erroneously stayed the injunction order passed by the Trial Court without considering merits of the appeal. It has also been submitted that after this order, respondents have resiled from any compromise. The order of status quo cannot be stayed on the ground that there are chances of compromise between the parties.

4. Accordingly, the order dated 19.2.2026 passed by the District Judge, Etah, is hereby set aside to the extent staying the order passed on the interim injunction application passed by the Trial Court. The District Judge, Etah is directed to consider and decide the.application for interim relief, if any, filed in the appeal as well as the appeal, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within twelve weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Navin Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : Tanmay Agrawal Smt Ramwati .....Petitioner(s) Himanshu And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)

order, after ensuring service of notice upon all the respondents and providing opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties provided there is no other legal impediment.

5. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. March 18, 2026 Rishabh A227 No. 3400 of 2026 2 (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Digitally signed by :- RISHABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead