Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur

Smt. Shanti Devi W/O Late Shri Rameshwer ... vs Dr. Mukesh Kumar Sharma S/O. Shri ... on 20 September, 2018

Author: Alok Sharma

Bench: Alok Sharma

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

                    S.B. Civil Writs No. 21408/2018

1.     Smt. Shanti Devi W/o Late Shri Rameshwer Prasad, Aged
       About 65 Years, By Cast Bhramin, R/o. Plot No. 6213,
       Parsuram Nagar, Dher Ke Balaji, Jaipur Nagar Sikar Road,
       Jaipur.
2.     Smt. Sudha Sharma W/o. Shri Bhupnder Kumar Mittal,
       R/o. Behind Sodal Power House, Jaipur Sikar Road, Meena
       Ki Dhani, V.k.i. Road No. 14, Jaipur.
3.     Smt. Radha Sharma W/o. Shri Rajesh Sharma, R/o. 45,
       Subhash Nagar, Bhilwara
4.     Smt. Madhu Mishra W/o. Shri Rajkumar Mishra, Through
       Radhyshyam Mishra, Plot No. 13, Basant Vihar, Near
       Bhawani School, Sikar (Rajasthan)
                                                        ----Petitioners
                                Versus
1.     Dr. Mukesh Kumar Sharma S/o. Shri Rameshwer Prasad
       Sharma, By Cast Bhramin, R/o. Plot No. 6213, Parsuram
       Nagar, Dher Ke Balaji, Jaipur Nagar Sikar Road, Jaipur.
2.     Mahendra Singh S/o Shri Udai Singh Shekhawat, By Cast
       Rajput, R/o. Gram Khudi Chotti, Tehsil Laxmangarh, Distt.
       Sikar
                                                      ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Moondia for Mr. Kuldeep Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA Order 20/09/2018 The case of the defendants-petitioners (hereafter 'the defendants') is that the plaintiff-respondent (hereafter 'the (2 of 3) [CW-21408/2018] plaintiff) filed the suit for declaration, partition and permanent injunction in the year 2011 and albeit the defendants have been served and issues framed, it is still languishing at the stage of plaintiff's evidence for reasons of obstructive tactics by the plaintiff inter-alia by moving multiple frivolous misc. applications and otherwise seeking adjournments, which are granted on mere askance. It has been submitted that delay in adjudication of the plaintiff's suit entails repeated visits for the defendants to the trial court entailing expanding of valuable time as also money in pursuing the case. It has been prayed that the trial court be directed to dispose of the plaintiff's underlying suit for declaration, partition and permanent injunction expeditiously.

The prayer of the counsel for the defendants is quite reasonable.

The suit pending adjudication at the stage of plaintiff's evidence despite lapsing 7 years of its filing is indicative of the lethargy of trial court in administering justice and possibly of work overload yet such delays cannot be countenanced. In the circumstances, I would direct the trial court to dispose of the plaintiff's underlying suit for declaration, partition and permanent (3 of 3) [CW-21408/2018] injunction within a period of eighteen months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order. The trial court shall keep in view the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of M/s. Shiv Cotex Versus Tirgun Auto Plast (P) Ltd. & Ors. (2011) 9 SCC 678 and the provisions of Order 17 Rule 1 CPC. Adjournment in the suit not be granted without just cause and should, when warranted be by a reasoned order on a proper application being filed to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Further miscellaneous applications be decided as far as possible within three days of filing and when found frivolous be visited with costs even exemplary as a measure of the trial court regulating its proceedings without their being hijacked by mischievous resort to the otherwise salutary provisions of the Civil Procedure Code.

With these directions, this petition is disposed of.

(ALOK SHARMA),J DK Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)