Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

NASHRATULLAH & OTHERS versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE/SPECIAL JUDGE (E.C. ACT) & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Nashratullah & Others v. Additional District Judge/Special Judge (E.C. Act) & Others - WRIT - C No. 20445 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 7795 (26 April 2007)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon. Dilip Gupta, J.

This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 25.1.2007 passed by the Additional District Judge, Special Judge (E.C. Act) Fatehpur and the order dated 1.3.2004 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Divison), Fatehpur.

Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Fatehpur by the order dated 1.3.2004 had rejected the application for grant of temporary injunction filed by the plaintiff-petitioners in Original Suit No. 278 of 2003. The Appeal filed against the said order was also rejected by the learned Additional District Judge, Fatehpur by the order dated 25.1.2007.

A perusal of the order dated 25.1.2007 clearly shows that the disputed land was recorded as a pond and so it belongs to the Gaon Sabha. The Appellate Court has,  therefore, recorded a finding that the plaintiffs had no prima facie case and they were not going to suffer any irreparable injury, if injunction was not granted. These are findings of fact which had been recorded and the learned counsel for the petitioners has not been able to substantiate that there is any infirmity in these findings.

In this view of the matter, there is no good ground to interfere with the orders impugned in the present petition.

However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, I direct the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Fatehpur to decide Original Suit No. 278 of 2003 (Nashratullah and others Vs. Mst. Chhediya) within a period of six months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced by the petitioners before him.

Subject to the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is dismissed.

Dt/- 26.4.2007

Sharma/20445


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.