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.

Jagdish Vs. State of U.P. and ors.

Jagdish vs State of U.P. and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Jan 09, 2004
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/485547

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
Civil Revision No. 15 of 2004
Subject
Civil

Case Summary

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

-

Key legal issue
Civil
Acts & sections
Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 39, Rules 1 and 2

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Jagdish

Advocate J.N. Verma, Adv.

Respondent

State of U.P. and ors.

Advocate A.K. Mishra and ;V.K. Pathak, Advs.

Legal References

Acts
Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 39, Rules 1 and 2
Cases Referred
Jagdish v. State of U. P. and Ors.
Reported In
2004(4)AWC3433

Excerpt

- ordern.k. mehrotra, j.1. this is a civil revision under section 115 of the code of civil procedure against the order dated 29.1.2004 passed by the civil judge (senior division), lucknow on the application under order xxxix, rules 1 and 2 of the code of civil procedure in regular suit no. 56 of 2004, jagdish v. state of u. p. and ors., refusing to grant interim injunction in favour of the revisionist fixing long date for disposal of the application under order xxxix, rules 1 and 2 of the code of civil procedure.2. a perusal of the impugned order goes to show that the learned civil judge has not granted ex parte injunction and has issued notices to the defendant-respondents for disposal of the application under order xxxix, rules 1 and 2 of the code of civil procedure fixing 10.2.2004. since there is a supplementary lease in favour of the plaintiff-revisionist and the application for ad-interim injunction is to be disposed of on the next date, therefore, with the consent of the plaintiff-revisionist this civil revision is being disposed of by granting ex parte injunction to operate fill the date of final disposal of the application under order xxxix, rules 1 and 2 of the code of civil procedure.3. in view of the above, the civil revision is disposed of finally with the direction that the operation of the orders dated 3.1.2004 and 14.1.2004, passed by the defendants shall remain stayed till the disposal of the pending application for ad-interim injunction under order xxxix, rules 1 and 2 of the code of civil procedure. the learned civil judge (senior division), lucknow shall dispose of the pending application expeditiously.

Full Judgment

ORDER

N.K. Mehrotra, J.

1. This is a civil revision Under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the order dated 29.1.2004 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Lucknow on the application under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure in Regular Suit No. 56 of 2004, Jagdish v. State of U. P. and Ors., refusing to grant interim Injunction in favour of the revisionist fixing long date for disposal of the application under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

2. A perusal of the impugned order goes to show that the learned civil Judge has not granted ex parte injunction and has issued notices to the defendant-respondents for disposal of the application under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure fixing 10.2.2004. Since there is a supplementary lease in favour of the plaintiff-revisionist and the application for ad-interim injunction is to be disposed of on the next date, therefore, with the consent of the plaintiff-revisionist this civil revision is being disposed of by granting ex parte Injunction to operate fill the date of final disposal of the application under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

3. In view of the above, the civil revision is disposed of finally with the direction that the operation of the orders dated 3.1.2004 and 14.1.2004, passed by the defendants shall remain stayed till the disposal of the pending application for ad-interim injunction under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Lucknow shall dispose of the pending application expeditiously.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial