Court No. - 33
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6623 of 2018 Petitioner :- Aditya Pandey Respondent :- Bharti Pandey And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Bipin Kumar Tripathi
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.
The petition challenges two orders. First order dated 14.08.2018 passed by the Principal Judge Family Court, Allahabad in Suit No. 449 of 2017, which is impugned, is an order which only requires the plaintiff to correct the petition. The other order, dated 30.08.2018, challenged is an order by which only a date has been fixed for consideration of objection.
No order affecting the rights of the parties has been challenged.
The other prayer made in the petition is to direct the court concerned to take notice of written evidence on oath of PW3 to PW6 and to proceed as per ex parte hearing procedure.
Such a prayer cannot be accepted. Because courts are expected to function a per law. It is never appropriate to prejudge an issue and direct the court to decide the matter in a particular manner. It is only when the court commits an error that the superior court can step in and judicially review the order/proceeding of the court below.
The petition therefore appears to be misconceived and is dismissed as such.
Order Date :- 31.10.2018 Pkb/