Allahabad High Court
Shyam Narayan Shukla vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 7 June, 2021
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Jaspreet Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 10 Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 10510 of 2021 Petitioner :- Shyam Narayan Shukla Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home,Lko.& Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Arunendra Nath Mishra,Rajvendra Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
The Court has convened through Video Conferencing.
Heard Sri Arunendra Nath Mishra, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Anurag Kumar Verma, learned AGA for the State.
Grievance of the petitioner is that private respondent no.4 and 5, in collusion with some anti-social elements, wanted to dispossess him from his ancestral land and, therefore, he approached the Civil Court by filing Civil Suit No. 75 of 2020 for permanent injunction against the respondents no. 4 and 5 along with an application for temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, wherein an ad interim order abstaining the respondents from interference in the disputed land, has been passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Lalganj, Pratapgarh on 21.09.2020 but despite the aforesaid ad interim order dated 21.09.2020, the respondents no. 4 and 5 have not complied the ad interim order dated 21.09.2020 and harassed the petitioner, hence the instant writ petition has been filed.
Learned Additional Government Advocate, on the other hand, submitted that if the ad interim order dated 21.09.2020 passed by the Civil Court has not been complied with, the petitioner is having a remedy to approach the Court concerned under Order XXXIX Rule 2(A) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable.
Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that since the petitioner is having remedy to approach the Court concerned by filing appropriate application under Order dated XXXIX Rule 2 (A) of the Code of Civil Procedure, if the interim order dated 21.09.2020 has not been complied with by the private respondents, therefore, we are not inclined to exercise our extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 7.6.2021 Ajit/-