Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Shiv Bachan and Others Vs. Sugia and Others

Shiv Bachan and Others vs Sugia and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Jan 03, 2013
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1115476

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Allahabad High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
No. 2737 of 2012
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Shiv Bachan and Others

Respondent

Sugia and Others

Excerpt

.....under section 145/146 cr.p.c. have been undertaken in which the sub divisional magistrate passed an order on 21/12/2011 which has been assailed by the petitioners under section 482 cr.p.c. before this court in criminal misc. application no. 2815 of 2012. it is stated that an interim order has been passed on 24.1.2012 which is subsisting. the respondents who had filed original suit no. 344 of 1999 have lodged a time barred appeal no. 116 of 2011 which is also pending before the learned district judge. this fact has been brought on record through a supplementary affidavit filed today. it is thus clear that both the parties have preferred separate appeals against the judgment of the trial court and the matter is pending consideration before the learned district judge. according to the petitioners the urgency for an interim order has arisen on account of the proceedings that have arisen and the situation has been complicated on account of the cognizance having been taken by the sub divisional magistrate under section 145/146 cr.p.c. it is for this reason that the prayer has been made to dispose of the application for interim relief by the learned district judge. having heard learned counsel for the petitioner sri tiwari, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned district judge to take up appeal no. 35 of 2011 and 116 of 2011 simultaneously and dispose of the application for interim relief or the delay condonation application as the case may be simultaneously in both the appeals preferably within eight weeks of the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order before him after hearing the contesting parties. the writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid direction.

Full Judgment

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

In a dispute relating to certain holdings, the petitioners filed a suit no. 284 of 1999 where they also prayed for an interim injunction that was granted during the pendency of the suit. As a counter measure to the same, the defendants in the said suit also filed a suit no. 344 of 1999. Both the suits were consolidated and were finally decided on 7th of September, 2011 by which only partial reliefs were granted. Both the parties were aggrieved by the judgment of the trial court.

The petitioners who are the plaintiffs in suit no. 284 of 1999 preferred an appeal within time numbered as Appeal No. 35 of 2011. An application for interim injunction was filed in the said appeal which has not been disposed of as yet and the prayer made in this petition is to direct the learned District Judge to dispose of the said application expeditiously.

The reason given for the said prayer is that during the pendency of the appeal proceedings under Section 145/146 Cr.P.C. have been undertaken in which the Sub Divisional Magistrate passed an order on 21/12/2011 which has been assailed by the petitioners under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before this Court in Criminal Misc. Application No. 2815 of 2012. It is stated that an interim order has been passed on 24.1.2012 which is subsisting.

The respondents who had filed Original Suit No. 344 of 1999 have lodged a time barred appeal no. 116 of 2011 which is also pending before the learned District Judge. This fact has been brought on record through a supplementary affidavit filed today.

It is thus clear that both the parties have preferred separate appeals against the judgment of the trial court and the matter is pending consideration before the learned District Judge. According to the petitioners the urgency for an interim order has arisen on account of the proceedings that have arisen and the situation has been complicated on account of the cognizance having been taken by the Sub Divisional Magistrate under Section 145/146 Cr.P.C. It is for this reason that the prayer has been made to dispose of the application for interim relief by the learned District Judge.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Tiwari, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned District Judge to take up appeal no. 35 of 2011 and 116 of 2011 simultaneously and dispose of the application for interim relief or the delay condonation application as the case may be simultaneously in both the appeals preferably within eight weeks of the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order before him after hearing the contesting parties.

The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid direction.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial